Misconduct racism & Misogyny (FOI Ref: 501/26)

Request

Q1. How many officers received any kind of disciplinary sanction in the (i) 2023/24 and (ii) 2024/25 year as a result of a complaint of (a) racism, or (b) sexism/misogyny?

Q2. Please state what disciplinary action was imposed for each of the cases referenced in Question 1.

Q3. In relation to all the incidents in Q.1 where specific racist or sexist/misogynistic words or phrases were used please

• state what these words or phrases were and
• (ii) the specific disciplinary sanction imposed on the officer.

Q4. How many complaints of racism were made against your force by members of the public in (i) 2023/24 and (ii) 2024/25?

Response

We can confirm that some relevant information is held by West Midlands Police. However, while the majority of the information is attached to this email.  I am not required to release all of the information requested.

Q1. How many officers received any kind of disciplinary sanction in the (i) 2023/24 and (ii) 2024/25 year as a result of a complaint of (a) racism, or (b) sexism/misogyny?

Q2. Please state what disciplinary action was imposed for each of the cases referenced in Question 1.

2023/24:                     

3 officers received disciplinary sanctions as a result of racism.

Outcomes were: 1 Final Written Warning, 2 Would Have Been Dismissed

No officers received disciplinary sanctions as a result of sexism / misogyny.

2024/25:  

6 officers received disciplinary sanctions as a result of racism

Outcomes were: 1 Written Warning, 2 Would Have Been Dismissed, 3 Dismissed

No officers received disciplinary sanctions as a result of sexism / misogyny.

Q3. In relation to all the incidents in Q.1 where specific racist or sexist/misogynistic words or phrases were used please (i) state what these words or phrases were and (ii) the specific disciplinary sanction imposed on the officer.  

Exempt Section 40 (2) Personal information and S38 (1) Health and Safety

Q4. How many complaints of racism were made against your force by members of the public in (i) 2023/24 and (ii) 2024/25?

 

2023/24: there were 107 complaints/120 allegations (a complaint can have more than one allegation) alleging racism made by members of the public.

2024/25: there were 95 complaints/109 allegations (a complaint can have more than one allegation) alleging racism made by members of the public.

 In line with the above, I am required to complete a Prejudice Test/Public Interest Test (PIT) on disclosure. Please find this PIT below.

It is important to note the force operates under the Police Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Behaviour. This includes challenging any inappropriate behaviour or action which would discredit the police service or undermine public confidence in policing. Our Professional Standards department, take a robust stance and are committed to rooting out abuse of power, criminality and corruption whenever we find evidence of it. This is done by carrying out thorough investigations, offering support and dealing appropriately with anyone found to be acting in an inappropriate manner.

Reasons for decision

The withheld information is exempt by virtue of the following exemptions 

Section 40 (2) personal data 

Section 38 (1) Health and safety

Section 40(2) is an absolute and class-based exemption if to release the information exists would breach the third party’s data protection rights.  In this case to release this personal information would not constitute fair processing of the data. As this exemption is class-based I am not required to identify the harm in disclosure and in this instance I believe that the right to privacy outweighs any public interest in release.

Section 38(1)(a)(b) – Health and safety

 

Harm 

In responding to a request under the Freedom of Information Act, we are making the information available to the public, not just the individual making the request. 

Releasing details of the specific words used will undoubtedly cause significant harm to the mental health of the victims of these reports. It would be extremely distressing and upsetting to these individuals affected, to publish any new information which has not otherwise been publicized.

Even if the case is older and now concluded, publication of the requested information would bring the incident back to the foreground of the public eye. This disclosure to the public regarding a case which is now over would undoubtedly cause distress and mental anguish.

Considerations for disclosure

Members of the public need to be reassured that individuals reports and concerns are dealt with in a timely and correct fashion. This information could go some way towards reassuring the public that the West Midlands Police Force is actively dealing with such complaints.

 

Disclosing specific phrases used would provide a greater transparency in the processes and the actions of a public authority. It is clear that there is a public interest in public authorities operating in as transparent a manner as possible, as this should ensure they operate effectively and efficiently.

 

Considerations against disclosure

Even though some of the information may already be out in the public domain through press releases and court hearings from the various cases, for West Midlands Police to publish any information may cause the family and friends further upset and anguish as the topic may be re published in the public domain. Where the release of information may impact a person’s health be it physical or mental, the information would be deemed as unsuitable for release. 

The public must be confident that West Midlands Police are committed to ensuring that information provided by them will only be used for appropriate purposes and that the confidentiality of any information given will be maintained. Therefore, they should be assured that West Midlands Police would never disclose information that would breach confidentiality.

Balancing Test

For a public interest test, issues that favour release need to be measured against issues that favour non-disclosure. The public interest is not what interests the public, or a particular individual, but what will be the greater good, if released, to the community as a whole.

The issues of transparency and awareness are noted. However, on balance it is considered that the public interest in releasing any information is outweighed by the potential impact release would have on individual’s health and well-being, especially that of the victim.  Also those people that were possibly witnesses or that could have had an unconnected death may also suffer upset by the release of this information, as it may bring back issues / memories of their experiences.  

Having considered the arguments for and against, the public interest test favours withholding the requested information. West Midlands Police will not disclose information that could reveal information that could cause such upset, as the irreversible harm to health it may cause outweighs the need for releasing the information.