header-logo header-logo

01 May 2019
Issue: 7838 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Phone disclosure policy sparks concerns

‘Unnecessarily intrusive’ forms could deter victims from coming forward

Lawyers are preparing a legal challenge over controversial national consent forms that ask victims of crime, including rape and sexual assault victims, to hand over their phones and digital devices to police or risk a prosecution not being brought.

The forms state that, while crime victims can refuse consent and can explain why they don’t want to give consent, ‘it may not be possible for the investigation or prosecution to continue’ if they refuse.

Lawyers and groups representing victims believe the consent forms policy is unnecessarily intrusive and will deter victims from coming forward.

The Centre for Women’s Justice (CWJ) is acting for two victims of rape affected by the type of consent form now rolled out nationally by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC). The complainants’ cases were dropped after they refused consent for disclosure of data on their mobile phones. The judicial review will be brought against the NPCC rather than the individual police forces concerned.

Harriet Wistrich, CWJ director, said: ‘Many rape complainants have raised this issue―the practice has been ongoing but not consistent across police forces―the change announced is a standardisation of practice.

‘We consider it may breach data protection principles, is an excessive and disproportionate invasion of privacy and is discriminatory as it will primarily impact women.’

Civil liberties group Big Brother Watch is likely to join the case as a co-complainant.

Responding to an urgent question in the House of Commons this week, policing minister Nick Hurd MP said the form, introduced this week, will ensure ‘consistency and clarity’.

A statement from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) said: ‘Mobile phone data, or social media activity, will only be considered by the police when relevant to an individual case.   

‘However, for an investigation to proceed and be fair for both complainant and suspect, all reasonable lines of enquiry must be pursued. Mobile devices will not be needed in every case―but when they are, there is explicit guidance that only material relevant to a particular offence may be pursued, to minimise unnecessary intrusion.’

The CPS reiterated that ‘strong safeguards are in place to prevent complainants being cross-examined on irrelevant sexual history’.

Issue: 7838 / Categories: Legal News , Criminal
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll