The High Court was informed that the Metropolitan Police made a decision to mandate officers to disclose any past or present membership in Freemasonry following concerns raised in 16 intelligence reports. This decision stemmed from a WhatsApp message found during a criminal investigation, where an officer referred to Freemasonry as a “brotherhood” that could influence promotions.
Currently, employees are required to reveal any membership in organizations that are hierarchical, have confidential memberships, and require mutual support and protection. In response to this policy, two Freemason police officers and three organizations representing Freemasonry are seeking legal action, claiming that this requirement violates their human rights and creates unwarranted suspicion.
The Metropolitan Police’s move to include Freemasonry membership in declarable associations was prompted by a review of the unsolved 1987 axe murder of private detective Daniel Morgan, where Freemasonry was identified as a source of distrust in investigations.
The court heard arguments from both sides, with the claimants contending that creating a “black list” of Freemasons for risk assessment is discriminatory, while the Metropolitan Police defended the disclosure requirement as essential for public confidence in officers and the proper execution of police duties.
Despite claims that the policy breaches human rights and may lead to stigmatization, the Met argued that the requirement is justified and proportionate in maintaining transparency and impartiality within the police force. The legal battle continues, with a ruling expected later this month following the conclusion of the hearing before Mr. Justice Chamberlain.
