November 25, 2025 | Operational Policing, Investigations and Events , Registered Sex Offender Management
Request Number: FOI/16146
Category: Incident and Crime Statistics - Sexual Offences
Subject: Sex offenders
Request and Answer:
In relation to request number FOI/16146 Police Service of Northern Ireland is providing an NCND response and will explain this further in the response 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.
Question
How many registered/convicted sex offenders including incarcerated persons currently reside in the following areas?
- Sydenham East Belfast
- Bloomfield East Belfast
- Newtownards Road East Belfast
- Belmont East Belfast
- Strandtown East Belfast
Answer
In relation to this request, the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) is providing a Neither Confirm nor Deny (NCND) response. This means we can neither confirm nor deny that we hold the information you have requested. We will explain how the exemptions we are relying upon operate in our response below.
In accordance with the Act, this letter represents a Refusal Notice for this particular request. Section 1 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA) places two duties on public authorities. Unless exemptions apply, the first duty at Section 1(1)(a) is to confirm or deny whether the information specified in the request is held. The second duty at Section 1(1)(b) is to disclose information that has been confirmed as being held.
Where exemption/s are relied upon Section 17(1) of FOIA requires that we provide the applicant with a notice which
a) states that fact,
b) specifies the exemption(s) in question and
c) states (if that would not otherwise be apparent) why the exemption applies.
The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) can Neither Confirm Nor Deny that it holds the information relevant to your request as the duty in Section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 does not apply by virtue of the following exemption(s):
Section 31(3) - Law Enforcement
The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with section 1(1) (a) would or would be likely to, prejudice any of the matters mentioned in subsection (1).
Section 38(2) - Health & Safety
The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if, or to the extent that, compliance with Section 1 (1)(a) would or would likely endanger the safety of an individual.
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) – Personal Information - The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if to do so would contravene any of the data protection principles.
Section 44(2) Prohibitions On Disclosure - The duty to confirm or deny does not arise if the confirmation or denial would have to be given to comply with Section 1(1)(a) would (apart from this Act) fall within any of paragraphs (a) to (c) of Subsection (1)
‘Neither Confirm nor Deny’ (NCND)
There may be occasions when complying with the duty to confirm or deny under section 1(1)(a) would in itself disclose sensitive or potentially damaging information that falls under an exemption. In these circumstances, the Act allows a public authority to respond by refusing to confirm or deny whether it holds the requested information.
The decision to issue a ‘neither confirm nor deny’ response is not affected by whether we do or do not hold the information but relates to the consequences of confirming or denying the information is held. The starting point and main focus in most cases will be theoretical considerations about the consequences of confirming or denying that a particular type of information is held. The decision to neither confirm nor deny is separate from a decision not to disclose information and needs to be taken entirely on its own merits.
PSNI follow the Information Commissioner’s Guidance in relation to ‘NCND’ and you may find it helpful to refer to this at the following link:
Sections 31 and 38 are prejudice based, qualified exemptions, which means there is a requirement to articulate the harm caused by confirming or denying that the information is held as well as carrying out a public interest test.
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) is a class based exemption; therefore it is not necessary to carry out a public interest test.
Section 44 is an absolute exemption; therefore it is not necessary to carry out a public interest test.
The full list 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 31 (3) Harm in Confirming or Denying that Information is held
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, providing assurance that the Police Service is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat from criminals, this should be countered against the need to protect vulnerable areas, and ongoing Policing operational activity.
By confirming or denying whether information is held could hinder the prevention and detection of crime and impact on police resources. Resources may need to be increased in this area to reassure the public and protect the surrounding community. This would leave other areas vulnerable, leading to more criminal activity and hindering the PSNI in performing its law enforcement functions.
Section 31 – Factors Favouring Confirming or Denying that the Information is held
Confirming or denying whether any information is held would provide an insight into the PSNI. This would enable the public to have a better understanding of the effectiveness of the police. It would greatly assist in the quality and accuracy of public debate, which could otherwise be steeped in rumour and speculation. Where public funds are being spent, there is a public interest in accountability and justifying the use of public money.
Section 31 – Factors Against Confirming or Denying that the Information is held
By confirming or denying whether information is held could compromise law enforcement tactics which would hinder the prevention and detection of crime and impact on police resources which may need to be increased to reassure the public and protect the surrounding community. This would result in more risk to the public and consequently require the use of more police resources. Vulnerable areas could be identified by disclosure leading to more criminal activity placing the public in harm’s way.
Section 31 (3) - Balancing/Decision
Whilst the PSNI would always wish to be transparent and accountable, to confirm or deny the existence of the information would be likely to prejudice the prevention and detection of crime. There is a strong public interest in protecting individuals and preserving the effectiveness of law enforcement, the public interest test, therefore, must favour neither confirming nor denying that the information is held.
Section 38 - Harm in Confirming or Denying that Information is held
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, providing assurance that the Police Service is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat from criminals, this should be countered against the need to safeguard the Health and Safety of all members of the public.
To confirm or deny that this information is held may endanger the safety of residents living in this location. If PSNI confirm that information is held, any individual who lives in this location could be suspected of being on the sex offenders register and this could lead to reprisals from members of the local community.
Section 38 – Factors Favouring Confirming or Denying that the Information is held
Confirmation or denial of the existence of the information would allow for better informed public awareness and debate and would assist the public in deciding whether they should take steps to protect themselves.
Section 38 – Factors Against Confirming or Denying that the Information is held
Confirmation or denial of this information would create a significant risk to residents in these areas who may be suspected of being sex offenders. Potentially there is a likelihood of reprisals/attacks against those suspected of being on the sex offenders register.
Section 38 – Balancing/Decision
Confirmation or denial of whether the PSNI hold this information would amount to a release of information whether on this occasion or on other occasions where a similar request is made for details of registered sex offenders residing in a certain area. Whilst the PSNI would always wish to be transparent and accountable, no release under FOI should be made where an individual’s data protection rights would be breached. Not only would this be a breach of Data Protection legislation by the PSNI, but it would also leave the PSNI open to action against it by any individuals concerned.
In addition, the PSNI will not confirm or deny the existence of any information if this would be likely to endanger the physical or mental health of any individual or the safety of any individual. The Public Interest therefore must favour neither confirming nor denying that the information is held.
Section 40(5B)(a)(i) - Personal Information
(5B) The duty to confirm or deny does not arise in relation to other information if or to the extent that any of the following applies –
(a) giving a member of the public the confirmation or denial that would have to be given to comply with section 1(1)(a)
- would (apart from this Act) contravene any of the data protection principles
To confirm or deny that the PSNI hold or do not hold information would in fact confirm information about individuals including the fact such information may or may not be held. Confirming or denying whether information of the nature you have requested is held or not would be highly unfair to any individuals and would contravene the first data protection principle which states that personal information should be processed in a lawful and fair manner (s. 35 DPA 2018). When confirming or denying that information is held would breach an individual’s rights under the Data Protection Act legislation, Section 40 (5) becomes an absolute exemption, and there is no requirement to provide evidence of a prejudice occurring, or to conduct a public interest test. Such individuals, if the information was held or not, would have no expectation that details such as this would be released into the public domain, therefore PSNI’s data protection obligations to those individuals would be contravened. PSNI also followed the Information Commissioner’s ‘Neither Confirm nor deny in relation to personal data’ guidance in this case to support our rationale. In particular paragraph 16 of this guidance states:
“There may be circumstances, for example requests for information about criminal investigations or disciplinary records, in which simply to confirm whether or not a public authority holds that personal data about an individual can itself reveal something about that individual. To either confirm or deny that the information is held could indicate that a person is or is not the subject of a criminal investigation or a disciplinary process. If to do so would contravene data protection principles, for example because it would be unfair, then the public authority is not obliged to confirm or deny that it holds the information” (available at www.ico.org.uk). PSNI considers the information you have requested is exempt by virtue of neither confirm nor deny exemptions which PSNI is entitled to rely upon. This should not be taken as conclusive evidence that the information you requested exists or does not exist.
As we have set out in relation to the NCND exemption at Section 40 above, the decision to issue a ‘neither confirm nor deny’ response is not affected by whether we do or do not hold the information, but relates to the consequences of confirming or denying the information is held. The starting point and main focus in most cases will be theoretical considerations about the consequences of confirming or denying that a particular type of information is held. The decision to neither confirm nor deny is separate from a decision not to disclose information and needs to be taken entirely on its own merits.
Section 44 – Prohibitions on Disclosure
The Freedom of Information Act does not override other laws that prevent the disclosure of information, referred to as ‘statutory bars’, and section 44 of the FOIA makes it clear that information is considered to be exempt from disclosure if as stated in Section 44(1):
“(1) Information is exempt information if its disclosure (otherwise than under this Act) by the public authority holding it –
(a) is prohibited by or under any enactment,
(b) is incompatible with any obligation, or
(c) would constitute or be punishable as a contempt of court.”
Section 44 creates an absolute exemption so as to ensure that where information is subject to some prohibition on disclosure it will be exempt under the Freedom of Information Act. In this case PSNI consider that some of the information you have requested is exempt under section 44 of the Freedom of Information Act by virtue of the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements in Northern Ireland (MAPPA).
Whilst there is a public interest in the transparency of policing, providing assurance that the PSNI is appropriately and effectively engaging with the threat from criminals, this should be countered against the need to protect vulnerable areas, and ongoing Policing operational activity. To confirm or deny that this information is held may endanger the safety of residents living in these areas. If PSNI confirm that information is held and an individual who lives in or near this specific area is suspected to be on the sex offenders register then there is a likelihood of reprisals from members of the local community.
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.
However, none of this should be taken as conclusive evidence that any information relating to registered sex offenders who live in or near these area exists or do not exist.