Ikenna Okorie
Investigating Officer
Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
New Cathedral Buildings, Writers’ Square
11 Church Street

18th February 2025

Subject: Urgent: Request for Clarification, Grievances, and Police Investigation

Dear FOI Unit, Ikenna Okorie  ,

I acknowledge receipt of your response regarding my data request. However, your reply raises serious concerns about the integrity and effectiveness of your investigative process. It is evident that the decision regarding my data request was made without any input from the Northern Ireland Police, as no evidence of police involvement was included in the data packet provided. If police investigations did take place, you have failed to provide any record of them. If they did not, this constitutes a critical failure of duty.

Why Ikenna’s Defense is Legally Flawed

1. Misuse of GDPR Territorial Scope to Justify Police Overreach
   • GDPR Article 3 governs the applicability of data protection laws based on geographic jurisdiction. It does not override national child protection legislation or justify the misuse of police authority to enforce unlawful actions.
   • The use of police powers to prevent breaches of the Northern Ireland Act does not exempt authorities from compliance with child protection laws.
   • If Ikona is suggesting that GDPR territorial limits justify non-disclosure or obstruction of police misconduct, this represents a fundamental misinterpretation of the law.
2. Failure to Justify the Illegal Relocation of a Child
   • The movement of your daughter 500 miles away blatantly violates both The Children Act 1989 and The Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995.
   • No exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated to justify this unlawful relocation.
   • The failure of authorities to investigate, prevent, or rectify this breach compounds the legal violation.
3. Accountability for Misuse of Police Powers
   • The police appear to have been instrumental in enforcing an unlawful relocation rather than ensuring compliance with statutory child protection laws.
   • If police intervention was based on preventing a “breach of the Northern Ireland Act,” but in doing so they enabled a breach of child protection laws, this represents an abuse of power and a dereliction of duty.

I have already escalated this matter to Number 10 as a grace, as your handling of this issue demonstrates a significant lack of mandatory investigative skills. It is unacceptable that your office, tasked with independent oversight, has neither obtained nor presented any meaningful evidence from the very authorities under scrutiny. Instead, you appear to have based your conclusions entirely on my communications, without making any proactive effort to establish the facts independently.

Grievances and Failures Identified:

1. Failure to Secure Police Evidence & Investigate Properly
   • Your response contains no confirmation that the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) or any other relevant authority conducted an investigation into my daughter’s disappearance. If such an investigation exists, why has no record of it been provided? If no such investigation was conducted, why was this failure not identified and addressed by your office?
   • Your lack of action raises serious concerns about whether you have even sought clarification from the police regarding their role in this matter. If you have made no effort to engage with them, this represents a dereliction of duty.
2. Obfuscation of Legal Responsibilities & Misrepresentation of Care Laws
   • Your report wrongly asserts that “the Care Act does not apply in Northern Ireland.” While the Act itself may not extend to Northern Ireland, the statutory duties under equivalent legislation—the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995 and other safeguarding laws—clearly do apply.
   • My correspondence explicitly referenced these applicable laws, yet your response has entirely ignored them, allowing statutory breaches to remain unchallenged. This amounts to a misrepresentation of legal protections and facilitates further systemic failures.
3. Contradictory and Misleading Statements on Northern Ireland’s Care System
   • Your response states that there is “no care in Northern Ireland.” While I reluctantly agree that care provision has been catastrophically inadequate, your wording suggests an erroneous assumption that no legal framework exists.
   • The reality is that legal responsibilities do exist, yet they have been ignored in practice. Your office’s failure to acknowledge this distinction distorts the issue and undermines the urgency of addressing these breaches.
4. Breach of Statutory Child Protection Regulations
   • Your own enclosed records, including the communication dated September 18, 2024, to Danny Pike (BBC), recognize that thousands of children, including my daughter, were relocated nearly 500 miles away in direct violation of child protection laws.
   • The Children Act 1989, Section 22C(9)(b), and the Children (Northern Ireland) Order 1995, Article 27, explicitly state that a child should not be moved more than 50 miles from their parental home unless in exceptional circumstances. This safeguard was ignored in my daughter’s case, as it has been in many others, yet your office has failed to investigate or take action.
5. Deliberate Neglect of Investigative Responsibilities
   • Your response demonstrates that you have taken no steps to verify information from independent sources. If your office is basing its findings solely on my communications rather than conducting its own independent inquiries, this process is fundamentally flawed.
   • There is no indication that you have engaged with police authorities in either Northern Ireland or East Sussex to obtain official records or clarify their position. This lack of due diligence severely undermines your credibility as an oversight body.
6. Failure to Address Systemic Negligence & Corruption in Child Protection Services
   • My daughter has been missing and unaccounted for after 14 years in the care system following her mother’s death. East Sussex County Council’s failure to act resulted in her disappearance.
   • Despite overwhelming evidence of systemic failings, your office has neither acknowledged the scale of this issue nor demonstrated any intent to hold the responsible parties accountable.
   • You have failed to investigate how such a serious case of neglect and disappearance has been allowed to persist, and your continued inaction raises serious ethical concerns.

Immediate Actions Required:

I demand a comprehensive response addressing the following points:

1. Clarification on Police Investigation:
   • Was a police investigation ever conducted into my daughter’s disappearance? If so, provide full details and any associated records.
   • If no investigation occurred, explain why, and identify who made this decision.
2. Explanation of Oversight Failures:
   • What steps did your office take to engage with the police?
   • Why has no evidence been presented confirming whether a police investigation took place?
   • Why has your office not challenged this failure or taken steps to rectify it?
3. Reassessment of Legal Compliance:
   • Why does your report falsely state that no care laws apply in Northern Ireland?
   • How do you justify ignoring explicit legal provisions governing child protection and care?
4. Investigation into Police Conduct:
   • Given the absence of police evidence, will your office now open an investigation into police in Northern Ireland regarding their handling of this case?
   • If not, explain why you are failing to scrutinize police negligence in such a serious matter.
5. Rectification of Reporting Errors:
   • Your report has deliberately or negligently misrepresented legal facts. What steps will be taken to correct this and ensure accurate reporting moving forward?
6. Accountability Measures:
   • Your failure to investigate has serious consequences. How will your office be held accountable for its inaction?
   • What measures will be implemented to prevent similar investigative failures in the future?

Final Notice Before Further Action

This letter serves as a formal notification that your response is unsatisfactory and raises substantial concerns about your competence as an oversight body. Your continued failure to act appropriately will leave me with no choice but to escalate this matter further, including but not limited to:

• Filing a formal complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
• Seeking legal redress for the failure to conduct a proper investigation.
• Engaging with relevant parliamentary committees to expose systemic failures in your office.

I expect a full and substantive response addressing every point raised above, without further obfuscation or misdirection. Failure to do so will result in immediate escalation.

Sincerely,

Mr. Martin Newbold