FOI 515-2025 / May 2025 / Domestic abuse
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST REFERENCE NO: 515-2025
I write in connection with your request for information which was received on 9th May 2025 as follows:
I am writing under the Freedom of Information act to request data you have recorded on conduct investigations into police perpetrated domestic abuse (PPDA) led by your police force, from 1 January 2021 to 31 April 2025.
Specifically, I request the following information. Please send the response in an Excel spreadsheet.
Q1. PPDA CONDUCT CASES. The number of conduct cases instigated against police officers, and the number of individual officers they relate to, involving domestic abuse from 1 January 2021 to 31 April 2025
If your force does not have a specific flag used on Centurion to identify domestic abuse cases, please apply the methodology that you would usually use to identify and report on such cases, for example by searching for key words within the allegation summary field.
Please describe the methodology used. If your methodology is manual and time consuming to the extent that responding to the question would exceed time constraints, please limit your response to a reasonable time frame by starting with a later year, and describe the dates covered.
Please break down the number of cases by year and specify the number of individuals involved as well as the total number of cases:
|
YEAR |
COUNT OF POLICE OFFICERS |
TOTAL NUMBER OF CONDUCT CASES |
|
2021 |
|
|
|
2022 |
|
|
|
2023 |
|
|
|
2024 |
|
|
|
2025 (to end of April) |
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
Q2. PPDA CONDUCT OFFICER RANK. For the individuals identified above, please specify the rank of the police officer
|
INDIVIDUAL’S RANK |
TOTAL |
|
Constable |
|
|
Sergeant & above |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Q3. PPDA CONDUCT INITIAL OUTCOMES. For the cases identified above, please break down the initial outcomes of all conduct cases over the entire period (not broken down by year or rank etc).
|
INITIAL CONDUCT CASE RESULT |
TOTAL |
|
Discontinuance |
|
|
No case to answer |
|
|
Case to answer |
|
|
Ongoing/live |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Q4. PPDA CONDUCT CASE TO ANSWER OUTCOMES. For the cases identified above where there was a case to answer, please break down the action taken for all such cases over the entire period (not broken down by year or rank etc).
|
ACTION IF CASE TO ANSWER |
TOTAL |
|
Formal action |
|
|
No action |
|
|
Reflective practice |
|
|
Ongoing/live |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Q5. PPDA CONDUCT FORMAL ACTION TAKEN. For the cases identified above where there was formal action taken, please break down the sanction enforced, for all such cases over the entire period (not broken down by year or rank etc).
|
SANCTION IF FORMAL ACTION |
TOTAL |
|
Dismissal |
|
|
Would Have Been Dismissed |
|
|
Final Written Warning |
|
|
Written Warning |
|
|
No Action |
|
|
Proceedings Discontinued |
|
|
Other |
|
|
Ongoing/live |
|
|
TOTAL |
|
Q6. SIZE OF WORKFORCE. Please provide a snapshot of the number of police officers working for your force as of 31st December each year, and on 31st April 2025, by group of rank.
If that is not possible, please provide a snapshot at another specified date each year.
|
YEAR |
POLICE CONSTABLES |
SERGEANTS AND ABOVE |
TOTAL POLICE OFFICERS |
|
31 Dec 2021 |
|
|
|
|
31 Dec 2022 |
|
|
|
|
31 Dec 2023 |
|
|
|
|
31 Dec 2024 |
|
|
|
|
31 Apr 2025 |
|
|
|
|
TOTAL |
|
|
|
Please find the Warwickshire Police response set out below.
Response: Please be advised that Information relating to live conduct cases is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the following:
Section 31(1)(g)(2)(b) Law Enforcement - for the purposes of ascertaining whether any person is responsible for any conduct which is improper.
Section 31 is a qualified, prejudiced-based exemption and as such there is a requirement to evidence the harm caused in disclosure and also to carry out the public interest test.
Evidence of Harm
The release of information in relation to conduct cases that are still ongoing risks undermining those cases. It is important that public authorities are allowed to fully investigate any allegations of improper conduct without fear of any speculation entering the public domain and undermining the investigation. The Police Service is charged with enforcing the law, preventing and detecting crime and protecting the communities we serve. Disclosing details of ongoing conduct investigations would impact on the effectiveness of police procedures and investigations thereby hinder the prevention and detection of crime.
Public Interest Test
Section 31 - Factors favouring disclosure
The disclosure of details relating to conduct investigations involving police officers would provide the public with reassurance that Warwickshire Police take such matters seriously and that these are managed appropriately, ensuring all relevant enquiries are undertaken. Additionally, the disclosure of conduct investigation details would increase public confidence and could result in more people coming forward with information. Further, investigations are conducted using public funds; therefore, disclosing information provides transparency of the way public money is utilised.
Section 31 - Factors favouring non-disclosure
To release the requested information would undermine and compromise the force’s approach to law enforcement in relation to the investigation of such matters, as a consequence of which any investigation would be prejudiced. This would have an adverse effect not only on any individuals involved, but also on the force.
Balance Test
Any investigations which relate to police officers, including the way in which these are conducted, will be of significant public interest. Therefore, providing the details would show openness and transparency which are fundamental elements of the Freedom of Information Act. Where victims and witnesses have confidence that enquiries are being appropriately managed, they would be more likely to come forward and report incidents. The strongest argument for disclosure therefore is public awareness; however, this needs to be weighed against the strongest argument for non-disclosure, which in this case is effective law enforcement.
Effective law enforcement is the core function of the police service and is of paramount importance. Warwickshire Police has a duty to ensure that it does not disclose information that would undermine or compromise its approach to this core function which would lead to an investigation being prejudiced and an individual’s right to a fair investigation being undermined. The police service will never disclose information that places the public or its staff at risk, unless the public interest in doing so is more powerful than that risk.
At this time, it is my opinion that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing information in relation to any ongoing conduct investigations.
This letter serves as a refusal notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act for information in relation to live conduct cases, and the following responses are therefore based on finalised cases only.
Q1 response: Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in a request is held. The second duty at Section1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
When refusing to provide such information, because the information is exempt, Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires Warwickshire Police to provide the applicant with a notice which:
(a) states that fact,
(b) specifies the exemption in question and
(c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
I can advise that the requested information is held; however, the information is not suitable for disclosure in the requested format.
The exemption applicable in this case is:
Section 40(2) Personal Information
Section 40 is an absolute class-based exemption, which does not require evidence of the harm disclosure would cause and does not require consideration of a public interest test. That being said, where Section 40(2) is engaged, in order to make the exemption absolute there needs to be evidence that a Data Protection Principle would be breached by disclosure.
This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information relates to personal data of a third party or could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with any other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, due to extremely low numbers, providing the requested breakdown by year is likely to lead to the identification of an individual. Such a disclosure would breach individuals’ rights under the Data Protection Act 2018, in particular Article 5(1) of the GDPR which states that personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject.
This letter serves as a refusal notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act for the requested breakdown. Instead, a total figure has been provided across the entire period. Please see the information I am able to provide set out below.
When considering the information, please note that searches were conducted for all conduct cases recorded in the specified period involving police officers and where the marker of ‘Police Perpetrated Domestic Abuse’ was indicated (PPDA).
|
Year |
Count of Police Officers |
Total number of conduct cases* |
|
2021 |
2 |
2 |
|
2022 |
||
|
2023 |
||
|
2024 |
||
|
2025 (up to 31st April) |
||
|
Grand Total |
2 |
2 |
*Finalised cases only
Q2 response:
|
Individual's Rank |
Total |
|
Constable |
|
|
Sergeant and above |
2 |
|
Grand Total |
2 |
Q3 and Q4 response: I can advise that the requested information is held; however, it is exempt from disclosure by virtue of the following:
Section 40(2) Personal Information
Section 40 is an absolute class-based exemption, which does not require evidence of the harm disclosure would cause and does not require consideration of a public interest test. That being said, where Section 40(2) is engaged, in order to make the exemption absolute there needs to be evidence that a Data Protection Principle would be breached by disclosure.
This exemption is engaged where disclosure of information relates to personal data of a third party or could lead to the identification of an individual, either from that information alone or combined with any other information from within the Police Service or public domain. In this case, due to extremely low numbers, providing the requested information about outcomes is likely to identify an individual and provide personal information in relation to that individual. Such a disclosure would breach individuals’ rights under the Data Protection Act 2018, in particular Article 5(1) of the GDPR which states that personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner in relation to the data subject.
This letter serves as a refusal notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act for these parts of the request.
I can however advise that, in relation to Q4, no formal action was taken.
Q5 response: Not applicable.
Q6 response:
|
Year (as at) |
Constables |
Sergeants and above |
Total Officers |
|
31/12/2021 |
803 |
230 |
1033 |
|
31/12/2022 |
828 |
243 |
1071 |
|
31/12/2023 |
860 |
252 |
1112 |
|
31/12/2024 |
858 |
278 |
1136 |
|
31/04/2025 |
855 |
283 |
1138 |
.
Every effort has been made to ensure that the information provided is as accurate as possible.
Your attention is drawn to the below which details your right of complaint.
Should you have any further enquiries concerning this matter, please write or email the Freedom of Information Unit quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely
Freedom of Information Officer
Freedom of Information Unit
Warwickshire Police
PO Box 4
Leek Wootton
Warwickshire
CV35 7QB