Chief Constable Cleveland Police

The complainant has requested information relating to Operation Magnolia from Cleveland Police. Cleveland Police disclosed the parameters of Operation Magnolia and the name of the current SIO officer, but withheld the remaining names requested under section 40(2) of FOIA (third party personal information) to withhold the remaining requested names. For the remaining parts of the request, Cleveland Police advised that the remaining information was not held. The Commissioner’s decision is that: Cleveland Police was partially correct to rely on section 40(2) to withhold some names, but it should have disclosed the name of the Chief Constable. Cleveland Police was not entitled to rely on section 40(2) when refusing to provide the name of the Assistant Chief Constable, as it states this information could not be located. Based on the balance of probabilities, Cleveland Police has not conducted adequate searches for the remaining parts of the requested information. Cleveland Police breached section 10(1) of FOIA by not providing its initial response within the statutory timelines. The Commissioner requires Cleveland Police to take the following steps to ensure compliance with the legislation. Disclose the name of the Chief Constable in post when Operation Magnolia began. Conduct a fresh search for information relating to questions 1 and 4-8.  Cleveland Police must take these steps within 30 calendar days of the date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court pursuant to section 54 of the Act and may be dealt with as a contempt of court.