Tripartite Group details (FOI)

​​​​Request

For the period 1 February 2022 to 1 May 2022 (the "Relevant Period"), please confirm:

A

How many meetings of the Tripartite Group took place.

B

The dates of the meetings of the Tripartite Group.

C

The participants in the meetings.

D

Whether the Government of Jersey has copies of

i) the minutes of the meetings; and

ii) any other notes of what was discussed at the meetings.

Please also provide a copy of the agreed Terms of Reference for meetings of the Tripartite Group, in force during the Relevant Period.

Response

A

The States of Jersey Police can confirm that there were three meetings within the relevant period. 

B

The dates of the meetings were 4 February 2022, 4 March 2022 and 1 April 2022.

C

Attendees at the meetings were made up of members of the following:

• The States of Jersey Police
  
• The Financial Intelligence Unit
• The Law Officers’ Department
• The Economic Crime and Confiscation Unit and
• Jersey Financial Services Commission

Details of individuals attending are withheld under Article 25(2) of the Freedom of Information (Jersey) Law 2011.

D

Government of Jersey do not attend the meetings of the Tripartite Group, are not sent minutes, and would not hold notes of the meetings.

The Terms of Reference document is withheld as it is an internal document containing a description of processes used by intelligence officers, investigators, prosecutors and the Jersey Financial Services Commission and Article 42 (a), (b), (c), (g) and (h) apply. In addition, the document contains processes in relation to the tackling of serious financial crime including the financing of terrorism therefore Article 27(1) applies.

Articles applied

Article 25 - Personal information

(1) Information is absolutely exempt information if it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018.

(2) Information is absolutely exempt information if –

(a) it constitutes personal data of which the applicant is not the data subject as defined in the Data Protection (Jersey) Law 2018; and

(b) its supply to a member of the public would contravene any of the data protection principles, as defined in that Law.

Article 27 - National security

(1) Information which does not fall within Article 26A(1) is absolutely exempt information if exemption from the obligation to disclose it under this Law is required to safeguard national security. 

Article 42 - Law enforcement

Information is qualified exempt information if its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice –

(a) the prevention, detection or investigation of crime, whether in Jersey or elsewhere;

(b) the apprehension or prosecution of offenders, whether in respect of offences committed in Jersey or elsewhere;

(c) the administration of justice, whether in Jersey or elsewhere;

(d) the assessment or collection of a tax or duty or of an imposition of a similar nature;

(e) the operation of immigration controls, whether in Jersey or elsewhere;

(f) the maintenance of security and good order in prisons or in other institutions where persons are lawfully detained;

(g) the proper supervision or regulation of financial services; or

(h) the exercise, by the Jersey Financial Services Commission, of any function imposed on it by any enactment.

Public Interest Test

Article 42 is a prejudice based qualified exemption, which means that consideration must not only be given to both being in the public interest for withholding the Terms of Reference balanced against the public interest for withholding them, it must also be able to be shown that that the release of the Terms of Reference would, or would be likely be, prejudicial.

Prejudice test

Disclosure would be likely to prejudice the present or future investigation or prosecution of crime, or supervision or regulation of financial services by the Commission, by revealing agencies’ processes to those under investigation now or in the future.

Factors in favour of the release of the document

Disclosure would illustrate to the general public that agencies within Jersey are working collaboratively towards combating financial crime.

Factors in favour of withholding the document

Of the parties to the document, only the police are a Scheduled Public Authority. Procedures and policies used by the other parties are not intended to be the subject of Freedom of Information access, and it is not right that they should be obtained via the only party who is such an authority.  The request is for information that deals with their actions and processes, and their actions and processes are not those of a Scheduled Public Authority.

Caution should be applied to the disclosure of internal documents prepared for law-enforcement purposes. 

Balance Test

It is considered that whilst it is in the public interest to show that organisations in Jersey are working together to combat financial crime, it is not necessarily in the public interest for the public to know all the details of the way in which information is processed by the organisations involved.

There is an overwhelming public interest in maintaining confidentiality around live criminal investigations and the processes of investigative agencies.  Criminals might benefit from public disclosure of the document by adjusting their conduct accordingly.

The fact that two of the three relevant public authorities are not Scheduled Public Authorities suggests that the business of the group does not fall centrally into the type of business that Freedom of Information Law is intended to cover.

It is not thought that the public interest would be served significantly by disclosure of this particular document – disclosure would only serve to illustrate to the public that the agencies are working collaboratively, which the public already knows from the numerous documents already published by the Government of Jersey.​