Prosecution costs for case of former NCA officer, Simon Gaffney

Request

Please can you provide me with the prosecution costs for the failed prosecution of former NCA officer Simon Gaffney for misconduct in public office.

Can you also please provide reason why the prosecution was withdrawn.

Response

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) can confirm that as of 18 July 2024 the total prosecution costs stand at £3,673.30. The above figure accounts for prosecution counsel fees incurred thus far. The final costs therefore are subject to change.

The CPS does hold this information although it is withheld from disclosure under Section 30(1)(c) – Information held for the purposes of criminal proceedings which the authority has power to conduct of the FOI Act. Please refer to the attached Section 17 refusal notice which explains this exemption in more detail.

However, under section 16 of the FOI Act we have an obligation to advise what, if any, information may assist you with your request and can provide the following:  The CPS has a duty to keep all cases under continuous review. After consideration of the evidence following conclusion of misconduct proceedings relevant to the case, we decided not to proceed with the prosecution.

S17 Notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000

WITHHOLDING INFORMATION

Section 30(1)(c) – Information held for the purposes of criminal proceedings which the authority has power to conduct.

This is a qualified exemption which means that the decision to disclose the requested material is subject to the public interest test. It may assist you to understand the decision if the public interest factors taken into account in this case are explained:

Public interest factors for disclosure

• There is a strong public interest in the transparency and accountability of how the CPS prosecutes cases.
  Transparency increases public confidence in the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the wider Criminal Justice System.
  To increase public understanding of the CPS decision making and prosecuting process.

Public interest factors against disclosure:

• To disclose such information relevant to a criminal case, outside the established procedural requirements, would be likely to prejudice the decision-making processes involved in any future prosecutions which are necessary for the administration of justice.
• There is a strong public interest in safeguarding the prosecution process. Maintaining the confidentiality of communications between the Police and the CPS, as well as other public bodies is an essential part of this process. It is important for officials to be able to freely justify and maintain their thought process when making decisions on criminal cases, without fear of the routes leading to those decisions later being disclosed into the public domain.

On balance, I consider the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.