Death Of Vietnamese Nationals In Essex in 2019

Request Number: FOI/14405

Category: Incident and Crime Statistics Human - Trafficking Modern Slavery

Subject: Death Of Vietnamese Nationals In Essex in 2019

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 some information to which your request relates and this is being provided to you. We consider that some information you seek in your request exempt by virtue of sections 24, 30, 31, 38 and 40 of FOIA and have detailed our rationale as to why these exemption applies. 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 
Regarding the tragic case of the deaths of 39 Vietnamese nationals in Essex in 2019. I am making a Freedom of Information request for all documentation and evidence that is available to the public to be sent to me at this email address to enable me to get a clearer view of the actions of the perpetrators leading up to the tragedy and the subsequent police procedural actions in investigating the case. 

Clarification Sought 
Can you please confirm you are interested in PSNI public releases in regards to the above query or all documentation potentially held by PSNI in regards to it? 

Clarification Received 
I would like the public releases as well as all other documentation available to me. Answer Please see below the media releases to the public in regards to this case. The following is a tweet and media statement issued by PSNI on 23/10/2019: The Police Service of Northern Ireland is supporting Essex Police in its investigation into the murder of 39 people. 

The following is a media statement from Essex Police, issued on behalf of Essex Police, sent out on 01/11/2019: Detectives have urged Ronan and Christopher Hughes to come forward and hand themselves in to police in Northern Ireland.
Ronan Hughes, 40 and his brother Christopher Hughes, 34 from Armagh, Northern Ireland, are wanted on suspicion of manslaughter and human trafficking in connection with the deaths of 39 people, whose bodies were found in a container in Grays last week. Speaking in a press conference at Police Service of Northern Ireland Headquarters today in Belfast, Senior Investigating Officer Detective Chief Inspector Daniel Stoten said: "Today I want to make a direct appeal. Ronan and Christopher hand yourself in to police. We need you both to come forward and assist us with this investigation." 
Detective Chief Inspector Stoten went on to thank the local community and members of the road haulage and shipping industries for the support they have offered so far: "I would like to thank all those from communities in Northern Ireland and Ireland, along with those in the road haulage and shipping industries, who have come forward to share information and knowledge with us. You help has been invaluable.”
"We know that you are as appalled as the rest of the world following the deaths of 39 people, whose bodies were found in a container which travelled from Zeebrugge in Belgium to Grays in Essex last week. Finding Ronan and Christopher Hughes is crucial to our investigation and the sooner we can make this happen, the sooner we can get on with our enquires and bring those responsible for these tragic deaths to justice.” 
The pair are known to have links to Northern Ireland and Ireland, as well as the road haulage and shipping industries and detectives urge anyone who has been in contact with them or has any information about where they are to get in contact with us. 
"You may think your information is insignificant but even the smallest detail could be vital.” "Again I would like to express my thanks to all those who have already come forward and provided us with information." said Detective Chief Inspector Stoten. 
Anyone with information is asked to contact us on 101 or online to the UK Police Major Incident Public Reporting site. 
Information can also be given 100 per cent anonymously to independent charity Crimestoppers by calling 0800 555 111 or by visiting crimestoppers-uk.org 
Yesterday, Thursday 31 October, Police Service of Northern Ireland colleagues acted upon information received and stopped a lorry believed to be connected to Ronan and Christopher Hughes. The vehicle was subsequently seized. No further arrests were made. We would like to thank our colleagues in PSNI and An Garda Síochána, as well as communities on both sides of the border. We will continue to work with them until Ronan and Christopher Hughes come forward or are arrested. 
Any further media enquiries related to the ongoing investigation should be directed to the Essex Police press office on 01245 452450 [email protected]

The following is a media statement from Essex Police, issued on behalf of Essex Police, sent out on 07/04/2020:
Five men are due to appear virtually at the Old Bailey tomorrow, Wednesday 8 April.
They have been charged in connection with our investigation into the deaths of 39 Vietnamese nationals in October 2019.
Due to appear are:
Maurice Robinson, 25, of Craigavon in Northern Ireland, who pleaded guilty to conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration and acquiring criminal property at the same court on Monday 25 November.
His outstanding charges include 39 counts of manslaughter, transferring criminal property and conspiracy to commit a human trafficking offence.
Christopher Kennedy, 23, of Corkley Road in Darkley, County Armagh, Northern Ireland, who has been charged with conspiracy to arrange or facilitate the travel of people with a view to exploitation and conspiracy to facilitate the commission of a breach of UK immigration law.
Gheorghe Nica, 43, of Mimosa Close in Langdon Hills has been charged with 39 counts of manslaughter and one count of conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration. Alexandru-Ovidiu Hanga, 27, of Hobart Road in Tilbury and 37-year-old Valentin Calota of Cossington Road in Birmingham have both been charged with conspiring to do an act to facilitate the commission of a breach of UK immigration law by a non-EU person between 1 May 2018 and 24 October 2019.
Contempt of court reporting restriction re: Robinson: -
Media are advised that at the appearance of Robinson, an order under Section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 which prohibits the reporting of the names of Robinson’s co-conspirators. The Judge directed that what can be reported is that Mr ROBINSON entered a plea of guilty to Conspiracy with others but the other co-conspirators should not be named so as not to prejudice the future trials.

The following is a media statement from Essex Police, issued on behalf of Essex Police, sent out on 08/04/2020:
A man has pleaded guilty to 39 counts of manslaughter at the Old Bailey today.
Maurice Robinson appeared virtually this afternoon, Wednesday 8 April, in connection with our investigation into the deaths of 39 Vietnamese nationals in October last year.
The 25-year-old, from Craigavon in Northern Ireland, had previously pleaded guilty to conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration and acquiring criminal property at the same court on Monday 25 November.
Sentencing will take place at a later date.
The lorry driver has an outstanding charge of transferring criminal property to answer.
A 23-year-old from Northern Ireland also made a virtual appearance. Christopher Kennedy – of Corkley Road in Darkley, County Armagh – has been charged with conspiracy to arrange or facilitate the travel of people with a view to exploitation and conspiracy to facilitate the commission of a breach of UK immigration law.
Two others marked their first Crown Court appearance today and pleaded not guilty to the charges against them.
Gheorghe Nica, 43, of Mimosa Close in Langdon Hills, was the subject of a European Arrest Warrant (EAW) and was arrested in Frankfurt Airport on Wednesday 29 January. He has been charged with 39 counts of manslaughter and one count of conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration.
Alexandru-Ovidiu Hanga, 27, of Hobart Road in Tilbury is charged with conspiring to do an act to facilitate the commission of a breach of UK immigration law by a non-EU person.
We have also charged 37-year-old Valentin Calota of Cossingham Road in Birmingham with conspiring to do an act to facilitate the commission of a breach of UK immigration law by a non-EU person. He was not asked to enter a plea today. The trial will begin on Monday 5 October this year.
Eamonn Harrison, 22, of Mayobridge, Northern Ireland, has been granted leave to appeal his extradition to the UK under the terms of a European Arrest Warrant issued by the force and the Crown Prosecution Service. The EAW meant he faced 39 charges of manslaughter, and a charge of conspiracy to traffic people, as well as conspiracy to assist unlawful immigration. A further hearing will be held in Dublin on Thursday 7 May.
We continue to work closely with colleagues from the Crown Prosecution Service, and numerous international law enforcement agencies which include the National Crime Agency, and government offices in both the UK and Vietnam.
Contempt of court reporting restriction re: Robinson: -
Media are advised that at the appearance of Robinson, an order under Section 4(2) of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 which prohibits the reporting of the names of Robinson’s co-conspirators. The Judge directed that what can be reported is that Mr ROBINSON entered a plea of guilty to
Conspiracy with others but the other co-conspirators should not be named so as not to prejudice the future trials.

Additionally the PSNI has made the decision to exempt any other documentation in regards to this request and the rationale for this is outlined 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 exemption/s, as well as the factors the Department considered when deciding where the public interest lies, are listed below:

Section 24 (1) – National Security - Information which does not fall within section 23(1) is exempt information if exemption from section 1(1)(b) is required for the purpose of safeguarding national security.

Section 30(1)(a)(i) and Section 30(2)(a)(i) – Investigations and Proceedings - Information held by a public authority is exempt information if it has at any time been held by the authority for the purposes of any investigation which the public authority has a duty to conduct with a view to it being ascertained whether a person should be charged with an offence. Additionally, information held by a public authority is exempt information if it was obtained or recorded by the authority for the purposes of its functions relating to investigations falling within subsection (1)(a) or (b),

Section 31(1) - Law Enforcement – 31(1)(a) the prevention or detection of crime, 31(1)(b) the apprehension or prosecution of offenders

Section 38(1)(a)(b) - Health And Safety: Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to: 

(a) endanger the physical or mental health of any individual, or

(b) endanger the safety of any individual.

Section 40(2)(a)(b) by virtue of Section 40(3)(A)(a) – Personal Information – Information constitutes personal data and disclosure would contravene any of the Data Protection principles.

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 is a qualified prejudice based exemption and evidence of harm and a public interest test must be conducted.

Section 30 is a qualified class based exemption and there is a requirement to conduct a public interest test.

Section 31
Section 31 is prejudice based qualified exemption and there is a requirement to articulate the harm that would be caused in releasing the requested information as well as considering the public interest to ensure that withholding the information is the appropriate response.

Section 38
Section 38 is a qualified prejudice based exemption and evidence of harm together with a public interest test must be made.

Section 40
Section 40 (2) of the FOIA is an absolute exemption which means there is no requirement on PSNI to consider whether there is a public interest in disclosure. It is an interface exemption and we must consider whether release of the information would breach the General Data Protection Regulations (‘GDPR’) or the Data Protection Act 2018 (‘DPA’) Third party personal information constitutes ‘personal data’ under the GDPR (Article 4) and DPA (Part 1 s.3).

Exemptions Explained

Section 40
Under the Freedom of Information Act, PSNI must consider if information can be released into the public domain. I have therefore considered whether the disclosure of this personal data is subject to the exemption at Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 by virtue of s40 (3)(A)(a). As this information is ‘personal data’, PSNI considered whether disclosure would contravene any of the six data protection principles contained within the GDPR or DPA.

The six data protection principles are good information handling standards which PSNI must comply with in relation to how it handles personal information, including deciding whether to disclose it or not.

In particular, the first principle requires personal data to be processed in a lawful and fair manner. In considering whether it is ‘fair’ to any individual to release information about them, PSNI considered the likely expectations of those individuals and the nature of the information involved. Individuals must have confidence that their information is treated sensitively and appropriately by PSNI. We consider those individuals would not have any reasonable expectation PSNI would disclose such information of this nature about them. We consider it would be extremely unfair to those individuals and therefore a breach of the first principle of data protection legislation. This information is therefore exempt under section 40 (2) of the FOIA as it contravenes data protection legislation to release it and PSNI has made the decision to withhold that information

Harm for Section 24, 31 and 38
The release of information under Freedom of Information (FOI) is a release into the public domain and not just to the individual requesting the information. 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 disclosure to the world in general.

Every effort should be made to release information under FOI. However, to release any further information held, in relation to your request, may affect the ability of Police to investigate cases of this magnitude in future and risk undermining National Security. Additionally there may be health and safety implication for any individuals or companies involved in the investigation.

The prevention and detection of crime is the foundation upon which policing is built and the police have a clear responsibility to prevent crime, arrest those responsible for committing crime and those who plan to commit crime. However, there is also a duty of care to the public at large. The UK Police

Service has a positive undertaking to protect the public from harm and that duty of care to all involved, must be the overriding consideration.

Public Interest Test - Section 24, 30, 31 and 38

Section 24 – Factors Favouring Disclosure
Any information that would increase public knowledge in showing how resources are allocated would favour disclosure. This would also support the fundamental purpose of the Freedom of Information Act, which is to be more open and transparent in the way in which we police Northern Ireland, making us more accountable for our actions.

Section 24 - Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
Any information identifying the focus of policing activity that could be used to the advantage of criminal organisations, serious and organised crime groups to undermine the operational integrity of policing will adversely affect public safety and have a negative impact on, not only law enforcement at a local level, but policing and operations at a national level the impact of which risks the national security of the UK.

All UK police forces have a duty to fulfil their national security functions. The disclosure of this information would increase the risk to the safety of the public. The personal safety of the public is inextricably linked to national security and any information that could identify vulnerabilities would not be disclosed.

Section 30 – Factors Favouring Disclosure
Disclosure could promote public trust in providing transparency, demonstrating openness and accountability in relation to investigations conducted by PSNI. To release this information would reassure the public that the PSNI is effectively engaging with its investigative role. All police investigations will involve the use of public funds and where this is the case there is always a public interest in ensuring that those funds are not used unnecessarily or unwisely.

Section 30 - Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
The information requested is held for the purpose of investigations and therefore if PSNI were to release the requested information it could seriously compromise and undermine future investigations of this nature, thus hindering the course of justice. It would not be in the public interest to release information which would in turn impact on police investigations and lead to more crime being committed, placing individuals at risk.

Section 31 - Factors Favouring Disclosure
To disclose this information would adhere to the basic principle of being open and transparent, it would also lead to a better public awareness of the workings of the police.

Section 31 - Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
Any release would put into the public domain police methodology in how police conduct such investigations and release of the information requested would weaken policing capability in investigating future crimes of this nature.

Section 38 - Factors Favouring Disclosure
There is a public interest in the openness and transparency of the PSNI and providing the requested information would allow for better informed public awareness.

Section 38 - Factors Favouring Non-Disclosure
The requested material will, if released, could endanger the physical or mental health of family and friends of the victims by causing upset and distress. Additionally, there may be a risk of harm to those individuals or companies involved in the investigation, if their information was to be released.

Decision
It could be argued that there is a public interest in the transparency of investigations carried out by the police to ensure they are being conducted appropriately and in line with current investigative guidelines. However, the Police Service has a duty of care to all individuals involved in any investigation to ensure effective law enforcement and the prevention and detection of crime.

Release of this information could allow interested parties to gain an upper hand and awareness of policing decisions and methodology used during investigations, which could hinder police in investigating crimes of this nature and thus investigative opportunities may be severely hampered by the release of the requested information. PSNI must ensure that investigations or future evidence opportunities are not adversely affected by the release of information.

Furthermore, PSNI consider that by releasing may have the potential to identify individuals involved in this case and could pose a risk to their safety. Additionally, the mental and physical health of surviving relatives or friends may also be compromised by the release of this information. The health and safety of individuals must take precedence over the importance of public accountability and transparency.

On balance the requirement to withhold this information must therefore take precedence over the important issues of public accountability and transparency. Therefore, the public interest, in this instance, is best served by not releasing the information to which you seek access.