In a WhatsApp message, uncovered during a criminal investigation, one officer told another: 'It's a brotherhood and that's where a lot of people tend to bend it a little in terms of promotions if you catch my drift'

The Metropolitan Police's decision to compel officers to declare Freemasonry membership came after 16 intelligence reports highlighted concerns over the organisation, the High Court has been told.

It included a WhatsApp message uncovered during a criminal investigation in which one officer told another: "It's a brotherhood and that's where a lot of people tend to bend it a little in terms of promotions if you catch my drift".

Staff and cops are now required to reveal membership "past or present" of any organisation that is "hierarchical, has confidential membership and requires members to support and protect each other".

Two serving Freemason police officers and three bodies representing the organisation are now seeking to take legal action over the decision at the High Court. Claire Darwin KC, for the claimants, told the court on Wednesday that the move was a breach of their human rights as it allows the force to create a "black list" and is an "institutional signal of suspicion".

In December the Met said Freemasonry membership would be added to its declarable associations police, following a review into the 1987 unsolved axe murder of a private detective Daniel Morgan that cited Freemasonry as a source of "mistrust" in investigations.

Ms Darwin said: "The aim of the Metropolitan Police is to create a black list of Freemasons that they will then use to assess risk. If the Metropolitan Police were creating a list of anyone else who held a particular religion or belief, and then cross-checked promotions against that list, it would be denounced, rightly, as a discriminatory black list."

Ms Darwin said that 27 intelligence reports were made to the force in the three years to 2025 where Freemasonry was "mentioned", and 16 which were said to be "adverse or potentially adverse", but these had not been disclosed.

The "vast majority" of the 27 were anonymous reports and "a number" of them did not allege any wrongdoing, Ms Darwin said. Some might be regarded as HR matters, "office tittle-tattle" or conspiracy theories, such as the suggestion "someone was killed by order of the Freemasons," the barrister told the court.

Responding, James Berry KC, for the Met, told the court in his written submissions that 397 officers and staff had made declarations under the policy

He said: "The public confidence imperative in favour of officers and staff confidentially declaring their Freemasonry strongly outweighs the claimants' desire to keep membership secret."

Referring to the intelligence reports compiled in April last year, Mr Berry said it included a download from a criminal investigation into an officer which uncovered a WhatsApp message from another cop.

It said: "It's a brotherhood and that's where a lot of people tend to bend it a little a bit in terms of promotions if you catch my drift."

The barrister continued that claims that the decision breached officers and staff's human rights were "without merit" and that fears of stigmatisation are "not supported by the evidence".

He said: "Requiring officers to disclose true information about substantial associations in their life, relevant to vetting and assessments of conflicts in connection with police service, is designed to secure public confidence in every Metropolitan Police officer, and therefore the proper exercise of the functions of a constable." Mr Berry continued: "The claimants are wrong to state that the defendant has no power to impose the disclosure requirement. The claimants exaggerate the impact of the declaration requirement. The impact is, in any event, justified and proportionate."

He also said: "It does not appear to be disputed that there is a stigma associated with Freemasonry, which is long-standing, complicated and contested by the claimants.

"The defendant is not responsible for the stigma; but the defendant is responsible for addressing it, in connection with the exercise of police duties and functions by the defendant's officers and staff, and for positively maintaining public confidence in the impartiality and transparency of the Metropolitan Police."

Barristers for the two officers, who cannot be identified due to reporting restrictions, and the United Grand Lodge of England, the Order of Women Freemasons and the Honourable Fraternity of Ancient Freemasons have asked a judge to allow their challenge to proceed and to temporarily suspend the policy pending the full hearing of the claim.

Barristers for the Met have said that the challenge should be thrown out as it is "not arguable".

Ms Darwin said: "This is not a neutral 'administrative' request; it is an institutional signal of suspicion liable to colour perceptions and treatment of Freemasons."

The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude later on Wednesday with a ruling expected later this month.

在一起刑事案件调查中曝光的WhatsApp聊天记录显示，一名警员对另一名警员表示：‘这是个兄弟会，在晋升问题上很多人都会稍微变通一下——你懂的。’

据高等法院获悉，伦敦警察厅强制要求警员申报共济会成员身份的决定，是基于16份情报报告对该组织提出的担忧。

调查中发现的一条WhatsApp信息显示，一名警员对另一名警员说道：“这是个兄弟会，在晋升问题上，很多人都会稍微变通一下——你懂的。”

根据新规，员工与警务人员须披露其"过去或现在"加入的任何组织的成员身份，这些组织需满足以下特征：具有等级制度、成员身份保密且要求成员相互支持与保护。

两名在职的共济会警察官员及三个代表该组织的机构目前正就高等法院的裁决寻求法律诉讼。原告方律师克莱尔·达尔文王室法律顾问周三向法庭表示，这一举措侵犯了他们的人权，因其允许警方建立"黑名单"，并构成"制度性的怀疑信号"。

伦敦警察厅在12月表示，共济会成员身份将被列入其需申报的警察关联组织名单。此前针对1987年私家侦探丹尼尔·摩根（Daniel Morgan）斧头谋杀悬案的审查报告指出，共济会是导致调查过程中出现"不信任"问题的根源。

达尔文女士表示：“伦敦警察厅的目的是建立一份共济会成员的黑名单，用于风险评估。如果伦敦警察厅针对其他任何持有特定宗教信仰的人士编制名单，并依据该名单核查晋升资格，那么这种做法理应被谴责为带有歧视性质的黑名单。”

达尔文女士表示，在截至2025年的三年间，警方共收到27份提及"共济会"的情报报告，其中16份被标记为"不利或潜在不利"，但这些报告均未对外公开。

达尔文女士表示，这27份报告中"绝大多数"为匿名举报，且"其中多份"并未指控任何不当行为。这位出庭律师向法庭指出，部分内容可能涉及人力资源问题、"办公室闲言碎语"或阴谋论，例如"有人奉共济会之命遭杀害"的离奇说法。

伦敦警察厅的詹姆斯·贝里王室法律顾问在提交给法庭的书面陈述中回应称，根据该政策，已有397名警员和工作人员作出声明。

他表示："为维护公众信任，要求官员和员工秘密申报其共济会成员身份的必要性，远超过当事人对成员身份保密的诉求。"

贝里先生提到去年四月整理的情报报告时表示，其中包含了对一名警官刑事调查的下载资料，这些资料揭露了另一名警察发送的WhatsApp信息。

文中提到：“这是一种兄弟情谊，因此在晋升方面，很多人往往会稍微放宽标准——如果你明白我的意思的话。”

律师进一步指出，关于该决定侵犯官员和员工人权的指控"毫无根据"，且对污名化的担忧"缺乏证据支持"。

他表示："要求警员如实披露其生活中与警务工作相关的重大社会关系信息，这些信息涉及审查及利益冲突评估，此举旨在确保公众对每位伦敦警察厅警官的信任，从而保障警员职能的正当行使。"贝里先生进一步指出："原告方声称被告无权强制要求信息披露是错误的。原告方夸大了声明要求的影响。无论如何，这一要求的影响都是合理且适度的。"

他还表示：“共济会长期背负着污名，这一现象由来已久、成因复杂且受到申诉方的质疑，似乎已是不争的事实。”

被告方无需为这一污名承担责任，但其有义务通过下属警员的职务行为来消除该影响，并积极维护公众对伦敦警察厅公正性与透明度的信任。

由于报道限制无法透露姓名的两名警官的律师，以及英格兰联合总会、女性共济会组织和古代共济会荣誉兄弟会已请求法官允许其质疑程序继续进行，并在诉讼全面听证前暂缓执行相关政策。

伦敦警察厅的律师表示，这一质疑应被驳回，理由是它"无可争辩"。

达尔文女士表示：“这绝非一项中立的‘行政’要求，而是一种制度性的怀疑信号，很可能影响人们对共济会成员的看法和对待方式。”

钱伯伦法官主持的听证会将于周三晚些时候结束，预计本月晚些时候将作出裁决。