The Home Office illegally took nearly 2 years 5 months to answer a simple request about providing a summary of child sexual abuse operations. The first request was sent on 2015 Sept 23 
“Could you please state how many current child abuse named operations there are, briefly list the operations names, which forces is carrying out, what is the purpose of the operation and when they started, under the FOI Acts? ”
They ignored the substantive question and so another was sent on 4 March 2017 . The rather strange wording is a reference to what the Home Office admitted to having in the first request, but kept ignoring the requests to provide.
“Please could you provide a non -comprehensive high-level summary of current child sexual abuse operations (not including resourcing information)”
I had to report the Home Office to the Information Commissioners Office, who themselves take months to act, but eventually threatened the Home Office with contempt proceedings  [Appendix 1]. Finally a reply came from the Home Office providing much of the information, which is reproduced by means of jpgs below as well as links to pdfs.
A few things are redacted due to claimed exemptions 2018 Jan 31 WDTK Response letter 
The length of time that the Home Office took to reply is I believe an indication of their willingness to subvert the law and to hide as much information as possible about child sexual abuse.
The Home Office appear to have an agenda to hide, minimise and obstruct the uncovering of the real scale of child sexual abuse and also their part in it – from Stephen Smith and PIE and Leon Brittan, to missing files and the Wanless Reports to the domination of the IICSA Child Abuse Inquiry Secretariat. The Home Office would make a good subject of a blog post in itself.
Having managed to delay this information release by two and half years, this is a “win” for child abuser protectionists at the Home Office for whom delay is the norm and an essential tactic in their apparent mission to hide child sexual abuse.
I will be asking for an internal review soon re length of time taken, redactions etc
I have not had time to study the investigation summary information yet but would welcome comments on the significance of various parts by those who understand. I have picked out certain terms which I have printed after the summary of investigations, so that search engines may catch and register them.
One thing I did notice is that Patrick Rock submitted an abuse of process claim, which I personally did not know. Even the operation name for his investigation is redacted – I wonder why? Two tier justice.
Various FOI requests to police services were made by myself in about 2016 asking what operations they were undertaking, as the National Police Chiefs Council were unhelpful. I have not yet put all these into one document but they can be searched for in WDTK.
(click on pictures to enlarge)
Operations covered are:-
Operation Doublet GMP
Operation Pallial NCA – Gary Cooke, Roger Griffiths, George Neil Phoenix, Eddie Huxley, George Lightfoot, Marc Roy Norry, Gary Cook aka Gary Cooke, aka Mark Grainger.
Roger Owen Griffiths, Keith Percy Stokes were found not guilty
Janner Leicestershire Police
Operation Clover – Arshid Hussein, Shelley Davies
Op ? Sussex Police Neil Fox cleared
Op Kellerabbey W Yorks Police
Operation Yewtree Rolf Harris, Chris Denning, Gary Glitter
Operation Stovewood NCA S Yorks Police, Rotherham
S Yorks Police – Cliff Richard
Op Jaguar Cyril Smith GMP Knowl View
Pallial NCA John Allen and others Bryn Alyn
Operation Seabrook Durham Medomsley
Operation Tweed Cumbria Constabulary, SIO Doug Hall, Underley Hall School
Operation Kalpasi Met/FBI Southbank International School
Operation Trinity and [redacted] – Lambeth
Operation Winthorpe MPS St Pauls, redacted
Operation Fairbank MPS Tom Watsons Question
Operation Aster IPCC 8 police offers from S yorks, S wales and Bedfordshire over handling of Ian Watkins
Operation ? St Francis Catholic Boys Home, Shefford, Beds
Operation ? Wiltshire Handling of csa case in 1990s re Heath
Op Bullfinch – Thames Valley Police
Operation Hellador GMP
Operation Sanctuary Northumbria Police – Operation Shelter, Operation Shield, Operation Jupiter
Northumbria West End Newcastle
Northumbria Social media
Northumbria Kurdish males
Northumbria – sexual exploitation Sunderland
Northumbria Socail media
Northumbria or MPS 1. redacted
Northumbria or MPS 2 redacted
Northumbria or MPS 3 redacted
MPS organised crime
MPS Tower hamlets
W Yorks sexual exploitation Halifax, Bradford and more
GMP Bolton and Farnworth
Thames Valley Athena Guest House Oxford
GMP Operation Doublet
S Yorks Rotherham
Avon and Somerset Bristol
Derbyshire Police – Chesterfield and W Mids
S Yorks – Rotherham
Hampshire Operation Marmion
Operation Rice Thames Valley
Operation Voicer NCA
Operation redacted Patrick Rock – abuse of process claimed by Rock
Op redacted NCA /MPS Peter William Allott Deputy Head St Benedicts School Ealing
Op Jarra NCA /PSNI online child abuse
- The Sanctuary for the Abused [A] has advice on how to prevent triggers.
- National Association for People Abused in Childhood [B] has a freephone helpline and has links to local support groups.
- One in Four [C]
- Havoca [D].
- Useful post on Triggers [E] from SurvivorsJustice [F] blog.
- Jim Hoppers pages on Mindfulness [G] and Meditation [H] may be useful.
- Hwaairfan blog An Indigenous Australian Approach to Healing Trauma [J]
- Survivors UK for victims and survivors of male rape or the sexual abuse of men [K]
- Voicing CSA group [L] helps arrange survivors meetings in your area
- A Prescription for me blog Various emotional support links [M]
- Fresh Start Foundation Scottish not for profit group, helping child sexual abuse victims & survivors [N]
 2015 Sept 23 WDTK FOI to Home Office https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/home_office_3#incoming-722641
 2017 Mar 4 WDTK FOI request to Home Office https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/summary_of_current_child_sexual#outgoing-629886
 2017 Jan 11 Copy of ICO letter to me https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/summary_of_current_child_sexual#outgoing-725277
 2018 Jan 31 WDTK Response accompanying letter https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/393306/response/1104803/attach/3/43350%20response.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1
 2018 Jan 31 WDTK Response information pdf containing summary of csa operations https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/393306/response/1104803/attach/4/43350%20release.pdf?cookie_passthrough=1
[5a] 2018 Feb Summary of Police Operations from Home Office https://cathyfox.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/policeopshomeoffice.pdf
ICO Decision 10 Jan (bad formatting)
Freedom of Information Act 2OOO (FOIA)
Date: 1O January 2O18
lnlormatlon Commlsglon€rg OflIce lco.
2 Marsham Street
Ms C Fox
Decision (including any steps ordered)
1 The complainant has requested information about child sexual abuse
By the date of this notice, the Home Office has yet to provide a
substantive response to this request.
The Commissioner’s decision is that the Home Office has breached
sections 1 (general right of access) and 10 (time for compliance) of the
FOIA by failing to provide a valid response to the request within 20
working days of receipt.
The Commissioner requires the Home Office to take the following steps
to ensure compliance with the legislation:
provide the complainant with a response to her request which
complies with the requirements section 1(1) of the FOIA, or issue
a valid refusal notice.
5. The Home Office must take these steps within 35 calendar days of the
date of this decision notice. Failure to comply may result in the
Commissioner making written certification of this fact to the High Court
pursuant to section 54 of the FOIA and may be dealt with as a contempt
Request and response
lntormatlon CommlsslonerS Off lce rco.
On 28 March 2017, the complainant wrote to the Home Office (HO) and
requested informatÍon in the following terms:
“Please provide the previously manually compiled non-comprehensive
list of police child sexual abuse investigations that is no longer current
with date of compilation.”
The HO acknowledged receipt of the request but did not respond
substantively to it.
8. The complainant contacted the HO on 10 May, 15 July, 28 July, 13
August and 20 October 2017 asking for a response, but the HO did not
Scope of the case
9. The complainant contacted the Commissioner on 13 November 20L7 to
complain about the non-response of the HO to her request.
10. The Commissioner contacted the HO about the complaint and it
confirmed that a response had not been sent out.
Reasons for decision
Section I – general right of access
11. Section 1(1) of the FOIA states that an individual who asks for
information is entitled to be informed whether the information is held
and, if the information is held, to have that information communicated
Section 10 – time for compliance
L2. Section 10(1) of the FOIA provides that a public authority must comply
with section 1(1) promptly and in any event not later than the twentieth
working day following the date of receipt. From the information provided
to the Commissioner it is evident that the HO has not responded to the
complainant’s request within the statutory timeframe.
13. The Commissioner’s decision is that the HO did not deal with the request
for information in accordance with the FOIA. She considers that by
failing to respond to the request within 20 working days, the HO has
breached sections 1(1) and 10(1).
L4. The HO is required to respond to the request in accordance with
lnlormåtlon CommEdonerþ Olflce the
lnformatlon CommlsslonerS Olllce tco.
Right of appeal
15. Either party has the right to appeal against this decision notice to the
First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights). Information about the appeals
process may be obtained from:
First-tier Tribunal (Information Rights)
GRC & GRP Tribunals,
PO Box 9300,
Tel: 0300 L234504
Fax: 0870 739 5836
Email : GRC@hmcts.gsi.gov. uk
Website : http://www.j u stice. gov. u k/tri bu na ls/genera l – reg u latorychamber
16. If you wish to appeal against a decision notice, you can obtain
information on how to appeal along with the relevant forms from the
Information Tribunal website.
L7. Any Notice of Appeal should be served on the Tribunal within 28
(calendar) days of the date on which this decision notice is sent.
Jon Ma ne
fnformation Commissioner’s Office
[A] Sanctuary for the Abused http://abusesanctuary.blogspot.co.uk/2006/07/for-survivors-coping-with-triggers-if.html
Let justice be done though the heavens fall – Fiat justitia ruat cælum