Anti-Terror Arrests

Request Number: FOI/15239

Category: Incident and Crime Statistics - Counter Terrorism

Subject: Anti-Terror Arrests

Request and Answer:
Your request for information has now been considered. In respect of Section 1(1)(a) of the Act we can confirm that the Police Service of Northern Ireland does hold information to which your request relates. The decision has been taken not to supply the information you have requested and the reasons for this are set out in more detail below. We have also provided you with links to guidance issued by the Information Commissioner’s Office which we have followed in responding to your request.

Request
I am writing to submit a Freedom of Information (FOI) request for the number of anti-terror arrests made during the period from 24/06/2024 to 25/06/2025. Please provide the total number of individuals arrested under anti-terrorism legislation within this specified timeframe.

Answer
Between 1st June 2024 and 30th June 2025 there were 41 persons arrested under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (Figures include only those arrests that are linked to the security situation in Northern Ireland; persons who have been arrested under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act for other reasons are excluded). This information is published on the PSNI website, in the accompanying excel spreadsheet, as part of our ‘Security Situation Statistics – monthly update’ and this can be found via the following link:

https://www.psni.police.uk/official-statistics/security-situation-statistics

We are exempting the data you have requested, including the correlation of data into the date bracket you have provided and our reasoning is detailed below.

Section 17(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 requires the Police Service of Northern Ireland, when refusing to provide such information (because the information is exempt) to provide you the applicant with a notice which:
    a. states that fact,

    b. specifies the exemption in question and

    c. states (if not otherwise apparent) why the exemption applies.

The exemptions, as well as the factors the Department considered when deciding where the public interest lies, are listed below:

Section 24 (1) National Security – Information required for the purpose of safeguarding national security.

Section 31(1) (a) (b) - Law Enforcement – Information would be likely to prejudice (a) the
prevention or detection of crime (b) the apprehension or prosecution of offenders.

The full text of exemptions can be found at www.legislation.gov.uk and further guidance on how they operate can be located on the Information Commissioners Office website www.ico.org.uk.

Section 24 and 31 are prejudice based qualified exemptions which means there is a requirement to evidence the prejudice (harm) in disclosure and consider the public interest.

Harm
FOIA is considered to be a release to the world as, once the information is published, the public authority has no control over what use is made of that information. Whilst not questioning the motives of the applicant, this information could be of use to those who seek to disrupt any police investigation as it would provide valuable intelligence to terrorists and/or extremists on the effectiveness of counter terrorism activity by an individual police force, for arrests made specifically in relation to terrorism legislation.

The release of statistical data covering more information and for a different time period than what is already recorded, could reveal numbers that are illustrative of very low level information. This is harmful in itself for just one request, but the harm is magnified if repeat requests for different time periods were to be made and the mosaic effect of releasing this information could reveal weekly, even possibly daily, running totals of terrorism arrests. There is obvious harm from a counter terrorism/national security, and operational law enforcement/investigative perspective if that was to occur.

Modern day policing is intelligence led and this is particularly pertinent with regard to both law enforcement and national security. The public expect police forces to use all powers and tactics available to them to prevent and detect crime or disorder and maintain public safety.
 
The threat from terrorism cannot be ignored. It should be recognised that the international security landscape is increasingly complex and unpredictable. The UK faces a sustained threat from violent terrorists and extremists. Since 2006, the UK Government have published the threat level, based upon current intelligence and that threat has remained at the second highest level, ‘severe’, except for two short periods during August 2006 and June and July 2007, when it was raised to the highest threat, ‘critical’, and in July 2009, when it was reduced to ‘substantial’. The current threat level to the UK is ‘substantial.

https://www.mi5.gov.uk/threat-levels

If the PSNI were to disclose the number of arrests under terrorism legislation, broken down by the dates requested, it could lead to the correlation of low level data. This would undermine the PSNI’s policing capabilities, which consequently would be detrimental to their ability to deal with the on-going terrorist threat we face. 

Disclosure could ultimately prejudice the effectiveness of the national counter terrorism effort and would allow inferences to be drawn about force level counter-terrorism activity and identify vulnerability around the UK.

Public Interest Test
Factors favoring disclosure for S24
The public are entitled to know how public funds are spent and to disclose the requested information would allow the public to see where money is being spent and know that forces are doing as much as possible to combat terrorism.

Factors favoring non-disclosure for for S24
Disclosure could compromise any ongoing or future operations to protect the security and infrastructure of Northern Ireland. Crucial to safeguarding national security in Northern Ireland, is the ability to share information and intelligence. If such information was put into the public domain it could undermine work in this very important area and has the real potential to adversely impact upon national security.

Factors favoring disclosure for S31
To disclose the requested data would allow the public to understand that the police are robust in preventing and investigating terrorism-related activity. This would enable the public to have a better understanding of efficiency of the force in carrying out its law enforcement role and demonstrate our commitment to openness and transparency.

Disclosure would make members of the public more aware of the threat of terrorism and allow them to take steps to protect themselves and families. Improved public awareness may lead to more intelligence being submitted to police about possible acts of terrorism, as members of the public will be more observant to suspicious activity, which in turn may result in a reduction of crime.

Factors favoring non-disclosure for S31
The release of this information could compromise law enforcement tactics which would hinder the PSNI’s ability to prevent and detect terrorist crimes. Disclosure of this information, combined with additional information retrieved through other requests or personal knowledge, could lead to the identification of specific incidents were arrests were made. This could alert terrorists to where the PSNI may be targeting their investigations and could assist them in evading detection and therefore the public could be placed at a greater risk. The threat of terrorism will increase as more crimes are committed as a result of terrorists gaining knowledge about the investigative tactics of the PSNI. 

Balancing Test
It is acknowledged that wherever possible policing procedures must be transparent and accountable. However, police need to make balanced judgements which justify why some information needs to remain exempt and unpublished.

Once information is disclosed by FOI there is no control or limits as to who or how the information is shared with other individuals, therefore a release under FOI is considered a release to the world in general, not just to the individual requesting the information.

To disclose information that could breakdown the number of individuals arrested under terrorism legislation could start to indicate targets of policing investigations or operations, which could allow individuals to assess patterns of police activity and ultimately to avoid detection.

The security of the country is of paramount importance and the PSNI will not divulge information if to do so would place the safety of an individual at risk or undermine National Security or compromise law enforcement. Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing operations and in this case providing assurance that the police are appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat posed by terrorist activity, there is a very strong public interest in safeguarding both national security and law enforcement in the highly sensitive subject of terrorism.

Additionally, we feel that the public interest in transparency is more than met by the level of data published on the PSNI website.

It is our opinion that for these issues the balancing test for disclosing the requested information would not be in the public interest.