Police refused to name drug dealer who was passed confidential information by his trainee officer girlfriend to ‘protect his welfare’

A police misconduct panel has refused to name a convicted criminal who was fed secret information by his PC girlfriend, claiming it would ‘affect his welfare’ to identify him.

Corrupt 20-year-old Meryem Ilyas scanned West Yorkshire Police’s force systems to secretly pass intelligence to her drug dealer boyfriend.

The disgraced PC gave sensitive details, including pictures of an active police operation and investigated the fraudster, his family and accomplices.

While Ilyas was publicly shamed at a police misconduct hearing this week, his accomplice was granted anonymity.

Despite objections from members of the press who argued that transparency was essential to maintain public confidence in policing, a disciplinary panel ruled that doing so was ‘not in the public interest’.

The panel chair, former West Yorkshire deputy chief constable Catherine Hankinson, claimed the offender’s “welfare would be adversely affected” if named and referred to him only as the mysterious “Mr J”.

In his judgment he said: ‘While there is a significant public interest in these proceedings and the transparency of the proceedings, there is no public interest in naming a member of the public who is not the subject of the proceedings;

“Mr J is not alleged to have actively contributed to former PC Ilyas’ misconduct and naming him does not contribute to the purposes of these proceedings;

‘Mr J’s criminal behavior is made public in allegations and may be reported anonymously;

‘Mr J’s welfare is likely to be adversely affected by media coverage of this case;

‘As there is no public interest in naming Mr J, the potential adverse impact on his welfare is sufficient to make a reporting restriction appropriate in the circumstances.’

The decision is likely to fuel anger over the confidentiality of police disciplinary cases and raise new questions about accountability.

West Yorkshire Police said the decision was in line with legislation which states anonymity can be granted where it is deemed ‘necessary and proportionate to protect the welfare and safety of any informant or witness’ or ‘otherwise in the public interest’.

However, Home Office guidance also states that ‘there should be a presumption of transparency wherever possible’.

A force spokesman said: ‘The decision was made taking into account guidance from the Home Office and the panel concluded that there was no public interest in naming a member of the public who was not the subject of the proceedings.

‘Ultimately, it was considered that naming him would not serve the purposes of the malpractice case.’

Ilyas, who lives in Leeds, was caught when officers arrested ‘Mr J’ for dealing drugs in July this year.

West Yorkshire Police Station, where İlyas was a trainee constable

A search on his phone revealed messages revealing the extent of the couple’s relationship.

The hearing was told that pictures of wads of money and messages discussing drugs were sent between the pair.

It was also revealed that İlyas had disclosed classified information regarding the plainclothes police operation and scanned restricted computer systems three times.

Later, when confronted by his anti-corruption colleagues, she lied about the affair, claiming she had broken up with him and was ‘unaware of his criminal past’.

Ilyas later admitted the allegations, including failing to declare the relationship on the inquiry form when he joined the police in June 2024.

Ilyas resigned ahead of the disciplinary hearing and, had he remained in office, would have been dismissed for gross misconduct.

He is now banned from police work.

Former DDC Hankinson said the rogue PC was ‘undermining public confidence in policing’.

He said: ‘The public rightly expects police officers to act with honesty and integrity in the performance of their duties.

‘The vast majority of officers at West Yorkshire Police meet the high standards expected of them by the public and their superiors.

‘The former officer’s conduct falls significantly below these high standards and is damaging to the public and to his colleagues who work hard to build relationships and trust with the public on a daily basis.”

When approached by Elijah, he denied the crime and claimed the power had ‘ruined my future’.

He claimed: ‘I was a student civil servant. I literally walked out of training school at the end of last year.

‘I was really new to all this and I feel like I’m expected to know everything right away.’

Elijah did not attend the hearing in Wakefield, West York, and was not represented.

Last night she refused to name her now-offending ex-boyfriend and said: ‘I don’t want anyone else involved.’

Detective Superintendent Tanya Wilkins, from West Yorkshire Police’s Professional Standards Directorate, said: ‘We make it very clear that all police officers, staff and volunteers must disclose any personal contact with reportable associations, including criminals.

‘This officer clearly ignored this order. He also improperly accessed and shared police data and then lied about it, breaching standards of honesty and integrity.

‘Such behavior brings the police force into disrepute and undermines public confidence in it.

‘A panel has now determined that his actions amounted to gross misconduct and this officer would have been dismissed had he not resigned.

‘He will be added to the College of Policing’s Prohibited List and thus prevented from obtaining further employment in policing nationally.’