7 days ago
Police face weeks-long delay before they can reveal suspects' nationalities
Police face a weeks-long delay before they are allowed to reveal suspects' nationalities because Downing Street is waiting for new independent guidance before changing the rules.
Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, is urging forces to give more information about suspects' nationalities and migration status after Reform accused Warwickshire Police of a 'cover-up' over the rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton.
However, an official rule change on when foreigners can be publicly identified as suspects has been delayed because of a review that is not expected to be published until the autumn.
It came amid criticism of the Government's broader strategy on illegal migration, after Ms Cooper was unable to say whether a new deal with the French would allow small boat migrants to be deported this month.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, warned that the deal was 'wide open to abuse' because France does not have to share any data on who is coming to Britain – meaning new arrivals could include criminals and terrorists.
Ministers have asked the Law Commission, an independent advisory body, to update guidance on contempt of court rules, which currently prevent police or officials from giving details about suspects.
The review, commissioned in February, is not expected to report until the autumn, and a change in guidance for police forces could be implemented weeks after that.
Without an urgent change, ministers fear a repeat of the riots that followed the Southport stabbings last summer, while Downing Street has said police should be more 'transparent' about their suspects.
There is concern among law enforcement officials and in Whitehall that public debate about crime by migrants and the threat of violent protests at asylum hotels will culminate into a summer of 'disorder' on the streets.
Ms Cooper told the BBC on Tuesday: 'We do want to see more transparency in cases, we think local people do need to have more information.'
One police leader told The Telegraph that while the previous system of 'saying as little as possible in order to preserve a fair trial' had worked well in the past, the rise of social media had 'driven a coach and horses' through that approach.
He said the absence of information all too often created a vacuum, which was filled by mis- or disinformation, and said the risk to public order meant police must provide more information.
The review of police protocol follows inaccurate speculation on social media of the Southport attacker's identity last year, with users alleging that Axel Rudakubana was an illegal immigrant.
George Finch, the 19-year-old Reform leader of Warwickshire county council, on Monday accused the Government of covering up alleged crime by migrants in Nuneaton, claiming that the two men charged with the rape of a 12-year-old girl were Afghan. That claim has not been confirmed by police.
There is not currently any guidance issued to forces about disclosing the ethnicity or immigration status of an individual on charge.
The rules state only that a suspect should be named unless there is an exceptional and legitimate policing purpose for not doing so, or if reporting restrictions apply.
Philip Seccombe, the Warwickshire Police and Crime Commissioner, has said that any release of information by police should 'follow national guidance and legal requirements'.
The review of the guidelines on contempt of court was commissioned by Ms Cooper, Shabana Mahmood, the Justice Secretary, and Lord Hermer, the Attorney General, earlier this year.
The Law Commission's review is expected to find that police officials and ministers should be allowed to reveal more information about suspects in cases where there is a 'threat of serious public disorder'.
However, despite a request from ministers to publish new guidelines 'as soon as feasible', the body is not expected to report for some weeks.
The delay has effectively left police forces defenceless against accusations of a cover-up, while Downing Street is urging them to make more information available.
Another senior officer told The Telegraph any change to the rules would create new issues for the police because they do not routinely collect nationality and ethnicity data unless it is relevant to an investigation.
'The police's job is about gathering evidence and I can see some real practical difficulties in requiring forces to provide extra information,' the officer said.
A Home Office source said: 'Not only are we deporting foreign criminals at a rate that Chris Philp and Robert Jenrick never managed when they were in charge at the Home Office, but we are also publishing far more information about that group of offenders than the Tories ever did.'
Sir Keir is separately facing criticism over the one in, one out migrant deal agreed with Emmanuel Macron, the president of France, under which migrants who come to the UK illegally are meant to be swapped for people in France who have a legitimate asylum claim in Britain.
The Prime Minister announced on Monday that the process of deporting the first Channel migrants under the deal will begin within days.
But Mr Philp said the details of the agreement, published on Tuesday, show it will be a 'lawyer's paradise' that will make it too easy for migrants to stay.
The agreement states that people who have made 'clearly unfounded' claims under the Human Rights Act will not automatically be deported, meaning lawyers will be able to create lengthy delays.
The agreement states that anyone claiming to be under the age of 18 will be able to stay in the UK.
Mr Philp said that because Britain does not carry out robust age checks, it means that people in their 20s who could they are under 18 could be allowed to stay.
In addition, under the deal France will not have to hand over any data on the people they are sending to the UK, meaning they could be criminals or terrorists.
'This deal is unworkable and wide open to abuse,' he said.
'It's exactly what we've been warning about – a bureaucrat's dream and a lawyer's paradise set to prevent people ever being returned to France.
'There are no numbers specified, presumably because they are so small they would embarrass the Home Secretary. France won't even tell us any information about who we have to accept back, so they could be criminals or terrorists, and we wouldn't know.
'This is a pathetic deal, which simply won't work. No wonder this Government has presided over the worst channel crossing figures in history.'
