PUBLIC INTEREST TEST PROCESS Applicant Name: Reference: DJ 103/15 Ben Yates

EXEMPTION FAVOURING DISCLOSURE FAVOURING NON-DISCLOSURE

Section 30(2) Disclosure of information would Disclosure of the information requested refers (Investigations reassure the public in general and not only to those cases which have been subject and those resident or working in the of enforcement action and therefore relates to Proceeding by locality of the commercial information in the public domain, but also those a public premises, that appropriate police locations where there is only intelligence. authority) action was being taken to support Intelligence about offending, particularly in the community. relation to prostitution offences has to mainly come from members of the public or covert human intelligence sources. Off-street activities relating to prostitution have been proven too frequently be linked to organised criminal behaviour. Obtaining the supporting evidence to deal with such individuals and offending can be difficult; but making use of the different sources of intelligence allows an evidential picture to be built up which will allow enforcement activity. To disclosure the location of premises which are believed to be used for prostitution would result in police activity being frustrated, not only in relation to prostitution offences but the arrest and prosecution of the organised criminal who are involved in controlling such activities and often other forms of offending. It is not in the public interest to make any disclosure under FOI provision which would frustrate police activity or involve the uses of additional police resources to ensure that enforcement actions could take place. Additionally, where there is insufficient evidence to take enforcement action, disclosure of information identifying commercial premises would operate to damage the commercial activity at those premises. Information obtained for a policing purposes, should not be used to undermine commercial activity, where the information has not been tested in a Court of law and found to be correct. Decision: When balancing the public interest it is necessary to consider the release of the requested information into the public domain. The public interest is not what interests the public, but what would be of tangible benefit to the public as a whole.

The public interest test has clearly shown why the exempt information should not be disclosed. Where information can be disclosed there is a reference to public information in local media reports.

The decision therefore is that the information exempt in the response table will not be disclosed beyond that which is already in the public domain. Prepared by: D. Jackson, Disclosure Analyst (9848)