[2024] UKUT 71 (AAC)

[53] The Tribunal find that s31(1) is engaged and does apply by virtue of paragraph (a) "the prevention or detection of crime" and (e) "the operation of the immigration controls". Paragraph (a) applies even in the absence of knowing which specific crime is said to be committed. It is clear enough, on the basis of simple research, that entering a sham marriage for the purpose of deception would contravene s24a of the Immigration Act 1971. Paragraph (e) is at the heart of the request in question and so is highly relevant.

[54] The Tribunal have considered the criteria set out in the closed bundle and are satisfied that it would be likely, or more than probable that there would be prejudice, that would be real, actual and of substance. This prejudice would result from disclosure of the withheld information to the world at large. It is, in our view predictable that understanding the criteria could lead interested individuals or parties, to adapt their behaviour or answers to any questioning or subsequent investigation. We find that this in turn would have a negative effect, including on the voluntary supply of information to the HO in the future. The Tribunal therefore accept that Section 31(1)(a) is engaged.

[55] In any event and quite independently the tribunal further finds that the HO is best placed to assess the nature and extent of prejudice resulting from disclosure. Further it was the intention of Parliament that this should be so.

[56] The focus of the request is on the potential bias associated with the triage model, and this is clearly accepted by all parties. Specific nationalities may be more vulnerable to suspicions or accusations of abuse of systems and the processes involved. The Tribunal also accept that there will be some indirect discrimination for the reasons in the appellants arguments, however the Tribunal cannot support the suggestion that disclosure of the criteria will help to minimise or help to understand such prejudice in so far as the referral into the tool could equally have impact in terms of indirect discrimination. Therefore, and in any event, we find disclosure of the triage criteria is unlikely to meet the aim of the requestor.