ICO Decision On Bermuda Police Service
Information Commissioner Gitanjali Gutierrez issued Decision 31/2024 regarding the Bermuda Police Service.
A spokesperson said, “On 28 October 2024, Information Commissioner Gitanjali Gutierrez issued Decision 31/2024, Bermuda Police Service. It affirmed the Bermuda Police Service’s decision on a PATI request where the Applicant was seeking records related to complaints that had been made against thirteen police officers between 1 August 2018 and 30 June 2021. The BPS disclosed an anonymised table of information and refused access to the underlying records because they contained personal information, and the public interest did not favour disclosure.
“The Information Commissioner found that the Bermuda Police Service was correct to withhold the records related to the complaints. No further action was required.
“The Information Commissioner commented that the Bermuda Police Service may consider publishing aggregate statistical data on internal conduct complaints against police officers to maintain the public’s confidence as it relates to its management of conduct complaints while also protecting personal information.
“To learn more about how public authorities and the Information Commissioner may consider the public interest test when making their decisions, the public may read the ICO Investigator’s Insight article in the June 2021 ICO Monthly Roundup.”
The full version of Decision 31/2024 follows below [PDF here]:
Read More About
Category: All
Without names, it is hard to identify a pattern of an officer’s specific bad behaviour. The only way around this could work would be to name specific officers, one per PATI request, and compare what is provided against the original nameless list. 300+ requests, including officers who retired during the PATI process, would work.
Why complaints against officers are not public records is upsetting. How many BPS personnel work second jobs? Should an employer be denied knowing that an officer has anger issues based on complaints? What about outside things like volunteer work? Does an officer have issues with yellow rubber ducks or clowns and balloons? Old people? Teenagers? White people? Black people? Women? Men? Animals? Tourists? Traffic stops?
After retirement and looking for a new job, is a potential employer not allowed to see the officer’s personnel record, including complaints? Major liability issues for any employer who does not know about documented issues. The new Head of Security at a major hotel has a problem with tourists – not good press for the hotel!
Have the complaints been buried because the officer is related to someone? Were there out-of-court settlements? Civil rights violations? To an inquiring mind, the denial stinks. It has huge legal ramifications for any court case where an officer’s conduct is in question.
We have seen DNA evidence discarded and cases re-examined. Is there something else in the wind? It is in the public’s interest to know.