The Human Rights Act 1998

The Human Rights Act should be considered but does not present a major obstacle to legitimate information-sharing activity for Crime & Disorder purposes but will need to be taken into account, when establishing whether the purpose of the exchange is lawful. This is especially true, when considering whether to exchange information for a crime and disorder activity, which is not clearly specified in the Crime & Disorder Act.

Article 3 expressly states that individuals have a

Freedom from torture or inhuman or degrading treatment

and that

No-one shall be subjected to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment

If the activity were to involve a breach of either these principles then the exchange of information would not be lawful.

Article 8 states that

everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life his home and correspondence

No-one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by the law

Article 8(2) stipulates that:

There shall be no interference by a public authority with this right except as in accordance with the law:

• in the interests of national security

• public safety

• economic well being of the country

• the prevention of crime and disorder

• the protection of health or morals

• the protection of the rights or freedoms of others

The general rule of proportionality will need to be applied in considering this:

any restriction of rights must be justified in that a fair balance must be achieved between the protection of an individual’s rights with the general interests of society.

Any disclosure of information must be restricted to a minimum and be the least harmful required to achieve the objective. Provided that the related activity is legal (i.e. complies with the other legislative restrictions contained in the Data Protection Act, article 3 etc.) and disclosure is proportionate then Article 8(2) will facilitate the exchange of information.

There has traditionally an unfortunate tendency for partnerships in the context of information sharing to focus narrowly on the rights of offenders in the context of the Human Rights Act. However, the Act also clearly imposes obligations in relation to protecting the public and victims. Article 8 for example states that:

“No-one shall be deprived of his possessions except in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided for by the law”.

Public Sector authorities should therefore be aware that unacceptably high levels of crime and a lack of protection for law abiding citizens could equally lead to legal sanction, especially where these involve financial loss for victims. Consideration should be given as to whether information sharing is necessary in order to facilitate crime and disorder interventions, which will enhance the protection of citizens or whether information should be released to enable victims to recover their losses, notwithstanding any other legal restriction.

These requirements underpin the need to disregard unnecessary organisational barriers and for partners to exchange information where legally permissible. The aim should always be to get the balance precisely right.

Back to Legal Considerations