Police told to unveil suspects’ ethnicity in high profile cases to prevent riots | UK | News
The police forces in the UK and Wales were told to release the ethnic origin and nationality of a suspect when he could reduce the risk of disorder. The new turning point directives come after the police have been criticized for publishing minimal information about Axel Rudakubana, the Police’s last summer, the Southport killer Axel Rudakubana.
When senior officers can now decide to publish the details of the suspect when they are circulating incorrect information or when the public interest is high. However, they will not confirm their immigration situations because there is information kept by the home office.
As reported Daily mailMersexide police were criticized for a lack of transparency after the arrest of Rudakubana last summer. False rumors spread online about the ethnic origin, which led to a national disorder and unrest throughout the country.
Before the new temporary guidance of the National Police Chiefs Council was introduced, the police forces provided only one suspect’s age, where and when they were detained. After the suspect is accused, his names, date of birth and addresses are published.
“Last summer during the disorder and in some high -profile cases, we have seen what information could be from the publication of the public sphere of the police.
“We must make sure that our processes in which our processes can travel incredibly quickly in a social media speculation age and in a wide variety of channels.
“Disinformation and false narratives can be kept in a gap. This is a good police work to fill this gap with facts about broader public interests.
“This guidance with this guidance, our aim is to provide more consistency with how we report this information. Being as fair, consistent and transparent as possible will increase confidence in policing as a definite source of this information – all our communities will make our communities safer in the process.”
Mersexide police, Liverpool FC Victory Pass Ceremony in May, after the crowd “Liverpool region of a 53 -year -old white British man” was rapidly arrested when a change in the police tactics emerged. In order to avoid speculation on social media, they knowingly published the suspect’s ethnic origin and nationality.
“This was a good decision and a good practice by Merseyside police. Forces have the authority to publish information if they serve a policing purpose,” said Sir Andy Marsh, General Manager of Policing College.
“These guidelines are about the suspects accused, but this is an important step to be as clear and transparent by the police that it does not affect a fair trial right, so that we can maintain the trust of the people, combat disinformation and minimize the community tensions caused by it.
“What we can’t do is release the knowledge of everyone we do not have, unidentified. And the publication of this information should serve not only to meet the curiosity of people who want to know, but to serve the purpose of a policing.”
In March, it was concluded by a independent guard dog that he could not share the basic facts about Rudakubana and created “dangerous fictions” that saved the rebellions. The Crime Reporters Association and the Editors Association has long fought for more openness and transparency than the police forces.
A home office spokesman: “People and the police force themselves, when, why and how information is published and to hide the legitimate and compelling reasons to ask for more clarity,” he said.
“The Ministry of the Interior will support this effort by allowing the release of the accompanying migration information that is appropriate to do so in the future cases and where the police wants.
“The government also asked the Legal Commission at the end of February to accelerate the elements of his examination around the insulting law about what could be said to the public before a trial.”
“The government also asked the Legal Commission at the end of February to accelerate the elements of his examination around the insulting law about what could be said to the public before a trial.”
