Tribunal dismisses Cabinet Office appeal over ministerial interests disclosure

Background and Context

The First-tier Tribunal (General Regulatory Chamber) recently dismissed an appeal by the Cabinet Office against the Information Commissioner's decision to disclose blank ministerial declaration of interests forms. The case, heard on 27 January 2025, revolved around a Freedom of Information request made by Mr Philip Kemp, seeking transparency in light of the controversy surrounding former Chancellor Nadhim Zahawi.

The Appeal

The appeal arose after the Cabinet Office refused Mr Kemp's request for the forms, citing exemptions under sections 36(2)(b)(i) and 36(2)(c) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. The Cabinet Office argued that disclosure would inhibit free and frank advice and prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs. Despite acknowledging the public interest, the Cabinet Office maintained that the potential harms outweighed the benefits of disclosure.

Information Commissioner's Decision

On 22 September 2023, the Information Commissioner ruled that while the exemptions were engaged, the public interest in transparency and accountability outweighed the potential risks. The Commissioner ordered the Cabinet Office to release the requested forms, emphasising the importance of public confidence in the ministerial declaration process, especially given recent controversies.

Tribunal's Consideration

The Tribunal, led by Judge Mornington, evaluated the competing public interests and the likelihood of prejudice. It found that the public interest in understanding the declaration process was heightened by the recent removal of Mr Zahawi from office. The Tribunal noted that transparency in the process was crucial for public confidence, particularly in the wake of significant political controversies.

Arguments and Evidence

The Cabinet Office, represented by Mr Ewan West KC, argued that disclosure could lead to speculative scrutiny and a chilling effect on ministerial candour. Mr Simon Madden, Director of Propriety and Ethics, expressed concerns about potential security risks and administrative burdens. However, the Tribunal found these concerns to be overstated and speculative.

Tribunal's Decision

The Tribunal concluded that the public interest in disclosure outweighed the potential harms. It emphasised that transparency in the declaration process was essential for public trust and accountability. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the Information Commissioner's decision to disclose the forms.

Implications

This ruling underscores the importance of transparency in government processes, particularly in the context of ministerial declarations. It highlights the Tribunal's role in balancing public interest against potential harms, reinforcing the principles of openness and accountability in public affairs.

Learn More

For more information on data protection, see BeCivil's guide to English Data Protection Law.