Freemasons have failed in their attempt to bring a legal challenge against Britain’s biggest police force over its decision to compel staff to declare whether they are or have been members.
Mr Justice Chamberlain said on Tuesday that the Metropolitan police’s decision “serves a legitimate aim, maintaining and enhancing public trust in policing, and is proportionate”.
Three bodies representing Freemasons in England, Wales, the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands, as well as two serving police officers who are Freemasons, had sought to take legal action against the force at the high court.
It came after the Met announced in December that membership of the Freemasons or similar organisations would be added to its declarable associations policy.
This means officers and staff are required to declare membership “past or present” of any organisation that is “hierarchical, has confidential membership and requires members to support and protect each other”.
About 400 Met officers and staff have already made declarations under the policy.
In a 17-page ruling on Tuesday, Chamberlain said the grounds of the proposed legal challenge were not “reasonably arguable”.
He said: “The purpose of such action, and therefore the purpose of the requirement to disclose the information, is the dual one of eliminating the potential for actual bias, where officers discharge their functions improperly, and perceived bias, where there is a perception or suspicion that officers are discharging their functions improperly.
“In both cases, the requirement is, in my judgment, designed to secure the proper exercise of the functions of a constable’. The contrary is not reasonably arguable.”
The judge added that the policy was not discriminatory or “unduly stigmatising” against Freemasons.
He added that leaving the decision of whether to declare membership of the Freemasons to individual officers and staff on an “ad hoc basis” would not “achieve the object of maintaining or enhancing public trust”.
After the decision, Cmdr Simon Messinger said on behalf of the Met: “We had been prepared to robustly defend our decision through the courts, so today’s judgment is welcome.
“Our declarable associations policy was changed after feedback highlighted concerns that involvement in these types of organisations could compromise impartiality or create conflicts of loyalty.
“Both victims of crime and those reporting wrongdoing must have trust and confidence there is no risk that investigations are tainted by such issues.
“We have prioritised this over any organisation’s desire to maintain secrecy.”
At a hearing on 11 February, lawyers for the two officers, the United Grand Lodge of England, the Order of Women Freemasons and the Honourable Fraternity of Ancient Freemasons asked the judge to allow the challenge.
Claire Darwin KC, for the claimants, said that the Met’s decision allowed it to create a “black list”.
In written submissions, the barrister said that the move was an “institutional signal of suspicion” that breached Freemasons’ human rights and was based on “limited, opaque and heavily perception-driven” evidence.
She continued that the police appeared to rely on “longstanding conspiracy theories and/or prejudicial tropes about Freemasons” as a reason to introduce the measure.
Barristers for the Met said the claim should be thrown out, telling the court that the suggestion officers would be blacklisted was “plainly wrong and that employees were “free to become or remain Freemasons”.
