Met HQ Performance & Assurance Information Law & Security Group

Met HQ Performance & Assurance Information Law & Security Group Information Rights Unit PO Box 57192 London SW6 1TR Telephone: 0207 161 3500 Facsimile: 0207 161 3503 Email: [email protected] www.met.police.uk Your ref: Our ref: 2015110000456 22 February 2016 Dear P John Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2015110000456 I write in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 09/11/2015. Your request was as follows: I would be most grateful if you would elaborate the following items; 1) Disclose what action you have taken (if any) in consequence of the statements made by Greg Miskiw, reported in the article entitled "Miskiw Confirms: News of the World subverted Murder Inquiry on behalf of Murder Suspects" (since that would appear to suggest a criminal offence has occurred) 2) Confirm or deny that in late summer of 2002, the Morgan murder inquiry team requested that the anti-corruption command led DAC Andy Hayman undertake a financial inquiry into in Alex Marunchak's dealings with Southern Investigations, and if so disclose that request, and indicate what action was subsequently taken. 3) Confirm or deny that DCS David Cook remains suspended and under investigation, and if so for what reason, and if not when that case was discontinued and for what reason 4) Confirm or deny the existence of an ongoing investigation into the Daniel Morgan case. Absent a positive answer to item 4 above, the axe murdering psychopath who killed Daniel Morgan is still at large, and it remains difficult to conceive the level of offending that would shame your officers into upholding the rights of the victim and the letter of the law. DECISION Questions 1, 2 & 3 In relation to question 3, I can confirm that former Detective Chief Superintendent David Cook has retired from the MPS and is therefore not currently suspended by the MPS. In relation to the remainder of questions 1-3, the MPS is not required to confirm or deny whether the information requested is held subject to the following provisions of the Freedom of Information Act 2000: Section 17(1) - Refusal of Request Section 22(2) - Information intended for future publication Section 23(5) - Information supplied by or relating to security bodies Section 30(3) - Investigations and proceedings Section 40(5)(b)(i) - Personal Data To the extent that information within the scope of your request would, if held, be held with a view to publication via the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel, section 22(2) would be applicable. Section 23(5) is a class-based and absolute exemption. Therefore, there is no obligation to provide evidence of harm or conduct a public interest test. Any information relating to your request, if held, would be held for the purpose of investigations and proceedings that the MPS have a duty to conduct. A statement confirming or denying whether information is held in relation to your request and similar requests for information would potentially undermine investigations and proceedings and/or unfairly disclose or infer personal data. Question 4 The MPS does not permanently close unsolved murder cases and they remain under review. In 2013, the MPS indicated that there was no likelihood of any successful prosecutions for the murder of Daniel Morgan being brought in the foreseeable future. On 10/05/2013, the Home Secretary announced the creation of the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel. The MPS is fully supporting the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel whose purpose and remit is to shine a light on the circumstances of Daniel Morgan’s murder, its background and the handling of the case over the whole period since March 1987. The independent panel may identify and recommend further lines of inquiry. REASON FOR DECISION Please see the legal annex for the sections of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 that are referred to in this letter and Appendix A for further information regarding the duty to confirm or deny. Section 22(2) (Information intended for future publication) Section 22(1) of the Freedom of Information Act states: ‘(1) Information is exempt information if— (a) the information is held by the public authority with a view to its publication, by the authority or any other person, at some future date (whether determined or not), (b) the information was already held with a view to such publication at the time when the request for information was made, and (c) it is reasonable in all the circumstances that the information should be withheld from disclosure until the date referred to in paragraph (a).’ Under section 22(2), the MPS is not required to confirm or deny whether information is held if this would involve the disclosure of any information (whether or not already recorded) which falls within section 22(1). Section 22 is a qualified exemption. Therefore, I am required to consider the public interest. Public Interest Test – Section 22(1) Section 22 - Public interest considerations favouring confirmation or denial Transparency The date for publication is yet to be determined Section 22 - Public interest considerations against confirmation or denial The efficient and effective conduct of the service Consideration of the information/circumstances is required prior to its public release. The spending of additional time and public funds may be wasteful Publication is dependent upon the progress of an ongoing criminal investigation and public inquiry Balance Test The terms of reference for the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel1 state: ‘5. The principles of the Independent Panel’s work will be: 1 https://www.danielmorganpanel.independent.gov.uk/panels-remit/panels-term-reference/ (a) full, genuine and effective participation of the family at all stages of the Panel’s work including genuine and full consultation and briefing throughout the process and payment of legal costs incurred on behalf of the family to this end; (b) “the family first” in terms of the release of the Panel’s findings and its report; (c) exceptional and full disclosure to the Panel of all relevant documentation including that held by all relevant Government departments and agencies and by the police and other investigative and prosecuting authorities; (d) maximum possible disclosure of documentation and information by the Panel to the family. 6. The Independent Panel will present its final Report to the Home Secretary who will make arrangements for its publication to Parliament. 7. It is envisaged that the Panel will aim to complete its work within 12 months of the documentation being made available. In the meanwhile, it is also envisaged that the Panel will brief the family incrementally, both on the progress of its work and on its emerging findings. The Panel will finalise these and other aspects of its work after three months when it has been able to assess the scope of its work and the desirability and practicalities of incremental disclosure.’ The Daniel Morgan Independent Panel Review’s protocol on disclosure of information2 sets out the arrangements for disclosure to the Daniel Morgan Independent Panel and states: ‘Provision of documents 4. In this Protocol, 'document' means anything in which information of any description is recorded. The Independent Panel's request for documents is broad-ranging. It may (depending on context) include copies of statements, pocket notebooks, policy statements, audio recordings, video footage, information stored electronically on computer systems, meeting notes and minutes, manuscript notes, memoranda, correspondence (post and/or fax) and internal and external email communications. The Independent Panel may also request physical evidence and where it does, references in this Protocol to 'documents' should be taken to include physical evidence… 12. (a) Requests for disclosure of material falling within the Terms of Reference by the Independent Panel create a continuing obligation. (b) The providing organisations will need to establish procedures to ensure that the existence of any new documents (i.e. those documents newly created and/or newly discovered and those newly acquired) which might fall within the Terms of Reference is identified and drawn to the attention of the Independent Panel so it may decide whether to request these. The disclosure obligation ceases once the Independent Panel has produced its Report and satisfied its terms of reference… 2 https://www.danielmorganpanel.independent.gov.uk/procedures/information-disclosure-protocol/ Onward disclosure of documents by the Independent Panel 15.It is expected that the Independent Panel will wish to draw on information contained in documents provided pursuant to this Protocol when producing its Final (and any provisional) Report. It may also wish to evidence that Report by referencing and publishing the source documentation on which it is based. 16.Before publishing any Report which has annexed to it any document or part of a document supplied by the providing organisations, the Independent Panel will: (a) supply the providing organisation concerned with a list of the documents or parts of documents in question; (b) permit the providing organisation to make representations concerning any redactions which may be necessary prior to publication (for example for reasons of data protection, to protect covert policing methodology, to remove information which is sensitive but irrelevant etc); (c) give careful consideration to any such representations; (d) seek to agree all redactions by consent; and (e) only publish documents and/or parts of documents disclosed to it with the express written consent of the providing organisation which supplied the particular document in question. The providing organisations will not unreasonably withhold consent. If the Panel considers that consent has been withheld unreasonably then it will not publish the material in issue, but it may publish the fact that it considers that consent has been withheld unreasonably. Public disclosure process 17.The Independent Panel's Terms of Reference include the 'family first' principle in terms of release of its findings and Report.

Load more