Section 31 - National security and defence
Challenge a refusal under FOISA section 31 - the authority says disclosure would harm national security or defence
What this exemption means#
The authority is saying that disclosing the information would harm national security or the defence of the United Kingdom. This is a serious exemption, but it still has legal requirements the authority must meet.
This is a qualified exemption, so the public interest test applies. However, be aware that a ministerial certificate under section 31(2) can make this exemption very difficult to challenge.
What the authority must show#
Section 31 has two main parts:
- Section 31(1) - exemption is required for safeguarding national security. Note the word “required” - this is a higher threshold than most exemptions. It’s not enough that disclosure might cause harm; exemption must be necessary.
- Section 31(4)(a) - disclosure would substantially prejudice the defence of the British Islands or any colony
- Section 31(4)(b) - disclosure would substantially prejudice the capability, effectiveness, or security of the armed forces and allied forces
For all parts, the authority must:
- Explain why the exemption applies to this specific information - not just assert that it “relates to” national security
- Carry out and explain a public interest test
Things to check#
Is there a ministerial certificate? Under section 31(2), a Minister can issue a certificate stating that the exemption is required for safeguarding national security. If a certificate has been issued, it is conclusive evidence and cannot be challenged by the Commissioner. This is rare - only one has ever been issued, ahead of the 2005 G8 Summit at Gleneagles. If one exists, your options are limited to judicial review.
Does the information genuinely threaten national security? Simply relating to security topics is not enough. The Commissioner has held that information about counter-terrorism strategy groups, for example, may be innocuous even though it touches on security matters. The exemption requires that disclosure would actually threaten national security.
Is the information already public? If similar information has been published by official sources, it is much harder for the authority to argue that disclosure under FOISA would harm national security.
Public interest? Even for national security, the authority must carry out a public interest test. The public interest test still applies even where a ministerial certificate exists.
Use the interactive tool#
Answer the questions below to check whether section 31 has been properly applied to your request.
What the evidence shows
What authorities typically argue
These are the arguments authorities most commonly make when withholding information under this exemption. Knowing them helps you prepare a stronger case.
- National security and defence Authorities argue that disclosure could compromise national security or reveal capabilities to respond to threats
- Risk of terrorist exploitation Information about security measures, stockpiles, or force capabilities could be used by terrorist organisations to plan attacks
- Public safety There is a strong public interest in maintaining public safety, which requires keeping certain security information confidential
- Preventing misuse of sensitive information Disclosure could enable the information to be misused in ways that are contrary to the public interest
Based on published decisions of the Scottish Information Commissioner. You can browse the decisions on the Commissioner's website.