« Consultation Questions para 7 | Main | The Consultation Process paras 17 to 20 »

Additional Consultation Questions paras 8 to 16

Additional Consultation Questions

8. Section 5 of the revised draft code of practice provides for special rules for the acquisition of communications data in matters of public interest involving sudden deaths, serious injuries and vulnerable persons.

9. In addition to its functions for preventing and detecting crime the police (and other emergency services too) have a duty of care to undertake enquiries in the wake of, for example, natural disasters, accidents, sudden events:

  • to help identify dead, seriously injured or vulnerable persons or their next of kin;
  • to identify, in the case of a vulnerable person, a responsible adult into whose care the person may be put;
  • to locate persons missing presumed dead or seriously injured, or
  • to locate vulnerable and other persons where there is a concern for their welfare or safety but no evidence that they are a victim of crime.

10. Section 22(g) of the Act provides that communications data may be acquired or disclosed where that is necessary for the purpose “in an emergency, of preventing death or injury or any damage to a person’s physical or mental health, or of mitigating any injury or damage to a person’s physical or mental health”.

11. In circumstances where the emergency has passed, and the disaster, accident or other event has happened, and a person has already died or been injured, or a vulnerable person has been taken into care, but it is necessary and proportionate to acquire communications data to identify the person, or their next of kin or other responsible person, section 22(g) does not adequately cover the circumstances involved. This was particularly true for enquiries made to identify, trace and account for victims of the Indian Ocean tsunami in December 2004 but is also true for more routine enquiries.

12. In non-emergency circumstances where a person (living or dead), their next of kin or other responsible person needs to be identified and communications data can assist in that identification, the Government is proposing to seek the view of Parliament on new statutory purposes for obtaining communications data where necessary for the purpose of:

  • (i) assisting in identifying any person who has died otherwise than as a result of crime or who is unable to identify himself because of a physical or mental condition, other than one resulting from crime, or
  • (ii) obtaining information about the next of kin or other connected persons of such a person or about the reason for his death or condition.

13. However, the proposed purpose would not assist the emergency services to determine the whereabouts and welfare of persons reported missing when there is nothing to indicate they are or have been the victim of crime or and where there is no reason to believe the statutory purpose in section 22(g) is applicable.

14. As part of this consultation the Government would welcome views on an additional purpose for obtaining communications data where a person is missing or otherwise unaccounted for and there is a concern for their safety or welfare and the person is not believed to be missing as a result of crime and where:

  • (a) the person is under the age of 16; or
  • (b) a request has been made to an emergency service to find the person by–
    • (i) a spouse, a partner or close relative or a person who lives in the same premises, or
    • (ii) a person responsible for the care and welfare of the missing person (such as the manager of a hospital or residential care home where the missing person resides); or

  • (c) the person is believed lost in a natural disaster or accident; or
  • (d) the person is the subject of an international missing persons enquiry made through the International Criminal Police Organisation (Interpol).

15. The police and the emergency services have much experience of conducting missing persons’ enquiries and handling, with tact, circumstances where a missing person is located, safe and well and who does not wish those who reported them as missing to know where they are. In that circumstance the wishes of the person reported as missing are respected.

16. Your comments and views are therefore invited on the following questions:

  • 5. Do you consider that an additional statutory purpose for obtaining communications data in missing persons enquiries, such as that described in paragraph 13, is necessary?

  • 6. Would a statutory purpose, such as that described in paragraph 13, achieve the right balance between allowing the emergency services to carry out their role in ensuring the welfare of citizens who are reported as missing and to protect those who do not want their whereabouts to be known by their family or other persons? If not, why not?

Comments

9-11 There should be a strict time period laid out for this. I would suggest 48 hours, after which time data collected must be securely destroyed.

16.5 No.

16.6 No. At the very least anyone should be able to register as "not wanting to be found" prior to going missing, in which case it should be an offence to try to locate them, unless they under 16 or are a ward of a court because they are unable to make decisions on their own behalf.

Again, there should be an onus on investigators to securely destroy any data collected which turns out to be irrelevant within a reasonable period of time. I'm thinking hours rather than days.

What exactly is the justification for abusing Communications Traffic Data where there is no emergency or no criminal investigation ?

Just because someone is a close relative or is / was living in the same household is not sufficient justification for any such request.

Where are the checks that, for example. there is no recent Restraining Order under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 ?

What about battered wives who have fled an abusive or violent spouse or partner, pehaps before any Court orders have been granted ?

Who exactly has been lobbying the Home Office for this change ?

  • Private Investigators ?
  • Debt Collectors ?
  • Tabloid newspapers and paparazzi photographers ?
  • Divorce lawyers ?
  • The murky adoption industry ?

If a person has suddenly gone missing from a hospital or residential care home then under what circumstances will a request for help by the manager not be treated as a possible medical emergency ?

In how many cases is it likely that vulnerable people suffering from, say Alzheimer's disease who go wandering off will actually have taken their mobile phones (as opposed to the heavily hyped mobile phone based electronic tags) with them, and have them switched on so that a Location Bassed Service fix on their position can be attempted ?

Why should this be done by anyone other than the Police via their Single Point of Contact system ?