college.police.uk

DigestJune 2016A digest of police law, operational policing practice and criminal justice

BetterEvidenceforBetterPolicing

™

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL

© College of Policing Limited 2016

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Non-Commercial College Licence v1.1 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence visit http://www.college.police.uk/Legal/Documents/Non_Commercial_College_Licence.pdf

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information, you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.

This publication is available for download at college.police.uk

Any enquiries regarding this publication or to request copies in accessible formats please contact us at digest@college.pnn.police.uk

The Digest is a primarily legal environmental scanning publication intended to capture and consolidate topical and key issues, both current and future, impacting on all areas of policing.

During the production of the Digest, information is included from governmental bodies, criminal justice organisations and research bodies. As such, the Digest should prove an invaluable guide to those responsible for strategic decision making, operational planning and police training.

The College of Policing is also responsible for Authorised Professional Practice (APP). APP is the official and most up-to-date source of policing practice and covers a range of policing activities such as: police use of firearms, treatment of people in custody, investigation of child abuse and management of intelligence. APP is available online at www.app.college.police.uk

Any enquiries regarding this publication or to request copies in accessible formats please contact us at digest@college.pnn.police.uk

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 3

Overview 4Legislation 5 Bills before parliament 5 Policing and Crime Bill 5 Investigatory Powers Bill published 5 Recently announced bills 6 New legislation announced in Queens speech 6 Statutory Instruments 7 Immigration Act 2016 (Commencement No.1) Regulations 2016 7 New legislation 8 Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 8Case law 9 Evidence and procedure 9 R. (on the application of Galdikas) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] 9

EWHC 942 (Admin)

Human rights 11 Staffordshire County Council v SRK & Anor [2016] EWCOP 27 11Policing practice 13 Crime 13 Statutory guidance on injunctions to prevent Gang-Related Violence and Gang-Related Drug Dealing 13 New powers to strengthen coastal security 14 Diversity 16 Inquiry on police diversity 16 Police 18 HOC 03/2016 police pension schemes (England and Wales) 18 Consultation on APP media relations 18 Inquiry into the safeguarding of ‘absent’ children 19 Consultation on definition of ‘missing’ 20Criminal justice system 21 Change to threat level from Northern Ireland related terrorism 21 New funding for health based places of safety 21 Non-police organisation use of PNC 22 Independent review into Sharia law launched 22

Contents

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 4

This month’s edition of the Digest contains a summary of issues relating to police law, operational policing practice and criminal justice.

There are case summaries on:

• applications for discretionary leave to remain in the UK from victims of human trafficking who are helping the police with their enquiries

• whether a welfare order should be granted to a local authority, authorising the deprivation of liberty of an individual who lacked capacity to make decisions.

We look in detail at:

• Psychoactive Substances Act 2016

• Commons Select Committee have published the findings of their inquiry into police diversity

• The All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Runaway and Missing Children and Adults inquiry into the safeguarding of ‘absent’ children.

We also look at the:

• legislation announced in the Queen’s speech

• new funding for health based places of safety

• HMIC report on the use of PNC by non-police organisations

• College of Policing consultations on media relations and the definition of ‘missing’

• statutory guidance on injunctions to prevent gang-related violence and gang-related drug dealing

• new powers to strengthen coastal security

• independent review into Sharia Law that has recently been launched.

The progress of proposed new legislation through parliament is examined and relevant Statutory Instruments are summarised.

Overview

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 5

LegislationBills before parliamentPolicing and Crime Bill

The Home Office has introduced a Policing and Crime Bill to enhance the democratic accountability of police forces and fire and rescue services, improve the efficiency and effectiveness of emergency services through closer collaboration and build public confidence in policing. A summary of the Bill can be found in the March Digest.

Progress

The Bill was introduced to the House of Commons and given its first reading on 10 February 2016. MPs are expected to debate the second day of the report stage followed by the Legislative Grand Committee and third reading on Monday, 13 June 2016.

The Bill can be accessed in full at services.parliament.uk

Investigatory Powers Bill published

The Investigatory Powers Bill, which was introduced on 1 March 2016, provides an updated framework for the use (by the security and intelligence agencies, law enforcement and other public authorities) of investigatory powers to obtain communications and communications data. These powers cover the interception of communications, the retention and acquisition of communications data, equipment interference for obtaining communications and other data. The Bill also makes provision relating to the security and intelligence agencies’ retention and examination of bulk personal datasets. A full summary of the Bill can be found in the April Digest.

Progress

The Bill was introduced and given its first reading on 1 March 2016. The remaining stages of the Bill were considered on Monday, 6 June and Tuesday, 7 June 2016.

The Bill can be accessed in full at services.parliament.uk

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 6 Legislation Recently announced bills

Recently announced billsNew legislation announced in Queens speech

The following legislation was announced in the Queen’s speech:

Counter-Extremism and Safeguarding Bill

The Bill will:

• introduce a new civil order regime to restrict extremist activity, following consultation

• safeguard children from extremist adults by taking powers to intervene in intensive, unregulated education settings that teach hate and drive communities apart and through stronger powers for the disclosure and barring service

• close loopholes so that Ofcom can continue to protect consumers who watch internet-streamed television content from outside the EU on Freeview

• consult on powers to enable government to intervene where councils fail to tackle extremism.

Criminal Finances Bill

The Bill will:

• introduce a criminal offence for corporations who fail to stop their staff facilitating tax evasion

• improve the operation of the suspicious activity reports regime to encourage better use of public and private sector resources against the highest threats, to target entities that carry out money laundering instead of individual transactions, and to provide the National Crime Agency with new powers

• improve the ability of law enforcement agencies and courts to recover criminal assets more effectively, particularly in cases such as those linked to grand corruption.

The Investigatory Powers Bill and the Policing and Crime Bill will continue from the 2015 to 2016 session. The progress of all of these bills through parliament will be covered in the Digest.

Further information can be accessed at gov.uk

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 7 Statutory InstrumentsLegislation

Statutory InstrumentsSI 603/2016 Immigration Act 2016 (Commencement No.1) Regulations 2016

These Regulations bring into force specified provisions of the Immigration Act 2016. Regulation 2 lists the provisions which came into force on 31 May 2016 and Regulation 3 lists the provisions which come into force on 12 July 2016.

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 8 Legislation New legislation

New legislationPsychoactive Substances Act 2016

The Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 came into force on 26 May 2016 and introduces a variety of measures relating to so called ‘legal highs’.

The Act introduces a number of offences relating to these substances including:

• producing a psychoactive substance (section 4)

• supplying, or offering to supply, a psychoactive substance (section 5)

• possession of psychoactive substance with intent to supply (section 7)

• importing or exporting a psychoactive substance (section 8)

• possession of a psychoactive substance in a custodial institution (section 9).

Those convicted of an offence under sections 4-8 of the Act face a sentence of up to 7 years, with those convicted under section 9 facing a sentence of up to 2 years.

The Act also introduces new civil sanctions including prohibition and premises notices to allow police to shut down ‘headshops’ and UK-based online dealers. Those who fail to comply with such sanctions face up to 2 years in presentment.

The Act can be accessed in full at legislation.gov.uk

Further information can be found in Home Office Circular 004/2016 at gov.uk

Home Office guidance is accessible at gov.uk

The College of Policing has also published a briefing note on the Act, which can be found at app.college.police.uk

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 9

Case lawEvidence and procedureR. (on the application of Galdikas) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2016] EWHC 942 (Admin)

The full judgment can be found at bailii.org

Facts

The court in this case considered applications for judicial review of the support regime for human trafficking victims, which had been created to comply with EU Directive 2011/36, which deals with preventing and combating trafficking in human beings and protecting its victims.

The home secretary’s guidance on victims of modern slavery stated that where an individual was a victim of trafficking there was a 45 day period in which support would be given to the victims. However it also stated that where the victims were assisting the police with a criminal investigation into the trafficking as in this case, the victim or their legal representative should not apply for discretionary leave to remain directly to the Home Office. Instead the guidance required the police to apply on the victims behalf.

In this case as the claimants made a direct application for discretionary leave to the Home Office they were rejected.

The claimant’s argument

They claimed that the home secretary’s guidance failed to recognise the duty under Article 11(2) of the 2011 Directive and the Council of Europe Convention on Action Against Trafficking in Human Beings, which stated that support must be provided after the 45 day period has expired.

The issues

The Court had to decide on the following issues in this case:

1. Was the obligation in Article 11(2) of the 2011 Directive (stated above) additional to and separate from the obligation in Article 11(1) to provide support for an appropriate period after criminal proceedings into trafficking had concluded.

2. Was the support regime for human trafficking victims lawful.

3. Could the claimants rely on the Convention, particularly Article 12, even though it had not been incorporated into English law.

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 10 Evidence and procedureCase law

The decision

The court then considered the issues above in turn.

1. The Article 11(5) of the 2011 Directive makes reference to the separate assistance and support measures in Article 11(1) and 11(2), therefore this showed that they are regarded as different and separate provisions. The court also concluded that Article 11(2) was not limited to those involved in criminal proceedings.

They also stated that there was no logical reason why Article 11(2) should be linked to criminal proceedings and that the Directive had not been intended to discriminate between trafficking victims who were connected with criminal proceedings and those who were not.

2. The court held that the policy of not allowing the trafficking victims to request discretionary leave to remain on the grounds of agreeing to assist the police where criminal proceedings were pending after the 45 day period had expired was unlawful. This was because the desired result in Article 11 of the Directive was not achieved and there was more than a possibility that the regime did not have the capacity to react more appropriately to ensure fairness.

3. The concession made on behalf of the home secretary in the case of R. (on the application of Atamewan) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2013] EWHC 2727 (Admin), that it would be a justifiable error in law not to give effect to the Convention insofar as government guidance purported to give effect to it, was not binding. The court held that the fact that the concession had been followed in other cases without argument did not mean that the Convention was part of English law.

However the court also held that the principle in the case of JH Rayner (Mincing Lane) Ltd v Department of Trade and Industry [1990] 2 A.C. 418, which stated that courts could not enforce rights under unincorporated treaties did not prevent the claimant from relying on the parts of the Convention adopted as the home secretary’s policy in her guidance. The guidance stated that she would have to act in accordance with Article 12 of the Convention unless there was good reason not to.

Conclusion

The court granted the applications for judicial review because applications for discretionary leave to remain should be accepted directly from trafficking victims who are helping the police with their enquiries.

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 11

Human rightsStaffordshire County Council v SRK & Anor [2016] EWCOP 27

The full judgment can be found at bailii.org

Facts

A local authority applied for a welfare order authorising the deprivation of liberty of K.

K had been injured in a road traffic accident and due to the injuries sustained he lacked capacity to make decisions on the regime of care and support he should receive. He had been awarded substantial damages, which were paid to his property and affairs deputy. Following the accident he lived in a property that had been adapted for him and the care regime created, on an objective assessment, amounted to a deprivation of liberty.

Issue

The issue in this case was whether the current situation was a deprivation of liberty that had to be authorised by the making of a welfare order.

The decision as to whether an order was needed was based on the test of whether K’s care regime was the least restrictive available option to best promote his best interests.

The decision

The court held that the critical issue was whether, if an order wasn’t made, were the amendments to the Mental Capacity Act 2005, which were brought in to deal with the lack of procedural regulation identified in the case of HL v United Kingdom (2005) 40 E.H.R.R. 32, sufficient in cases within the class represented by K’s case.

The court held that the answer to this question was no and stated that a welfare order did need to be made in cases such as K’s to provide a procedure that protected the relevant person from arbitrary detention, avoiding a violation of the state’s positive obligations under Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Right to Liberty and Security). This was because the state ought to know of the situation on the ground.

Human rightsCase law

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 12 Human rightsCase law

The court held that the state ought to know the situation in cases like this because when the Court of Protection appoints a property and affairs deputy the court should take steps to ensure a) that the local authority knew of the regime of care and b) that, as was the case with K according to the court, the least restrictive available care regime available to best promote the person’s best interest created a situation on the ground that satisfied the objective and subjective components of a deprivation of liberty.

Conclusion

As a result of the above the application for a welfare order was successful and was made by the Court of Protection.

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 13

CrimeStatutory guidance on injunctions to prevent Gang-Related Violence and Gang-Related Drug Dealing

HM Government have published the revised statutory guidance on injunctions to prevent Gang-Related Violence and Gang-Related Drug Dealing.

The revised guidance replaces that published in 2015 which reflected legislative changes made in the Serious Crime Act 2015 and the Crime and Courts Act 2013. It draws on the experience and knowledge of the police service, local authorities and a wide range of local partners involved in dealing with violent gangs and has been developed and approved by partners across the Criminal Justice System, as well as local practitioners.

This guidance, which local authorities and police forces are required to ‘have regard’ to is a practical tool intended to help local partners apply for and manage gang injunctions effectively and appropriately in accordance with the statutory framework. It is aimed at:

• local authorities and police forces who are seeking to apply for an injunction to prevent gang-related violence or gang-related drug dealing activity; and

• local partners who may be consulted by the applicant as part of the process. These may include, but are not limited to, registered social landlords, housing associations, transport agencies, probation and youth offending teams (where the respondent is aged 14 to 17 or has recently turned 18).

The guidance examines changes to gang injunctions legislation and why young people, in particular women and girls’ become involved in gangs. It also looks at how gang injunctions and gang related violence measures can be used to protect individuals from gang-related violence and help protect people from being drawn further into more serious activity.

The guidance provides information on how gang injunctions fit with other measures to tackle gangs and examines the different process for applying for gang injunctions, as well as the various prohibitions and requirements that can gang injunctions may impose. This includes information on the variation, discharge and review of injunctions and the consequences of breach. A Legislative Reference Document is also included which lists the measures available for local partners to use to deal with individuals or groups of people or problems places; and to protect communities, prevent violence, and support young people.

Policing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 14

The guidance also provides information on promoting awareness of gang injunctions for example by communicating the use or intended use of gang injunctions and by publicising details of particular gang injunctions.

The statutory guidance can be accessed at gov.uk

A practitioners’ guide is also available at gov.uk

New powers to strengthen coastal security

New powers to strengthen coastal security came into force on 31 May 2016 as part of the wide-ranging Immigration Act 2016.

The stronger maritime powers will allow Border Force officers to stop, board, divert and detain vessels and arrest anyone they suspect has broken immigration law. The new powers are intended to combat three immigration offences in the territorial waters of the UK: assisting unlawful immigration; assisting an asylum seeker to arrive in the UK; and assisting entry to the UK in breach of a deportation or exclusion order.

The additional measures will complement ongoing joint work already undertaken to address the situation in Northern France. The UK and French governments have combined to improve security, collaborate on returns and deter migrants from making the perilous journey across the Channel.

The new measures will see the introduction of patrol vessels which will be used to intercept attempts to smuggle dangerous weapons, drugs and migrants into the country. The first batch will be in place in the coming months, with all of the vessels operational by the end of next year. The vessels will add to the protection already offered by the Border Force cutters and Royal Navy vessels which patrol the UK coastline.

In addition, Border Force will set up 3 maritime co-ordination hubs in Cornwall, the Thames Estuary and the Humber over summer, committed to tackling a range of threats on the UK coastline. These hubs will see Border Force building greater partnership working with law enforcement and maritime partners, improving intelligence and creating a more flexible response team to address the threats identified. The hubs will also enable Border Force to increase its presence at smaller ports and to deploy officers quickly across the coastline where they are required.

CrimePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 15

James Brokenshire, Immigration Minister said:

Our investments and improvements over the past 6 years have left us with one of the most secure borders in the world. But we know we must go further and continue to adapt and react to the challenges we face.

That’s why we will be establishing a series of operational hubs, procuring additional boats and introducing new powers to make the UK’s coastline even more secure from criminals looking to smuggle guns and drugs or facilitate illegal entry into the country.

The news story can be accessed at gov.uk

CrimePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 16

DiversityInquiry on police diversity

The Commons Select Committee have published the findings of their inquiry into police diversity.

The inquiry follows on from a 2013 Report on Leadership and Standards in the Police which made several recommendations on improving diversity. That report identified that the progress has not been sufficient, and whilst there has been a steady increase in the overall proportion of officers and staff who are of a Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) background, progress is painfully slow, there is wide variation between forces, and increased numbers of BME police officers remain overwhelmingly in the most junior ranks. The inquiry highlights that the scale of the ongoing task in increasing BME representation in police forces remains immense, particularly as the BME proportion in the general population is increasing.

The inquiry is focused on 2 key areas: BME representation in police forces and change initiatives. The inquiry also makes a number of recommendations.

Key findings of the inquiry include:

• the overall proportion of BME police officers increased from 3.6% in 2006 to 5.5% in 2015

• of the 127,000 police officers in England and Wales only 6,979 were from BME backgrounds

• no police force in England and Wales has a BME representation which matches its local demographic

• only two police chief officers self-identify as BME

• 4 police forces employ no Black or Black British police officers

• 11 forces have no BME officers above the rank of Inspector.

The inquiry also found that:

• the retention and progression of BME officers remains a considerable challenge and institutional racism within the police service and hidden biases make it difficult for people to challenge decisions when they felt that they had been subject to unfair discrimination.

• forces have made progress in terms of identifying the factors contributing to relatively low rates of applications and recruitment of people with a BME background, but have not necessarily been successful in addressing and removing the barriers.

DiversityPolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 17

• interventions developed to address the issue of BME recruitment were not having sufficient impact since the effective implementation of schemes to support the career development of BME officers appeared to be subject to the discretion and commitment of individual forces.

• some forces, particularly the Metropolitan Police, have invested considerable effort in understanding and tackling issues related to BME representation in the police service. However, there was no evidence that the recommendations have been systematically evaluated or introduced more widely, or that less diverse police forces have made any effort to learn from the experience of more innovative ones.

• police and crime commissioners are the statutory mechanism for holding police chiefs to account on diversity and should take a much more active role on BME representation in their forces during their second terms in office.

• there is no visible, ‘go-to’ person who has clear responsibility for equality and diversity within the police service as a whole and across the 43 police forces.

The inquiry highlighted that urgent and radical action is needed to achieve the ambition of all police forces reflecting the ethnic profile of their communities. Reference was made to the work of the College and in particular the BME Progression 2018 programme which includes the development of an evidence base of successful approaches used by forces. A number of practical recommendations were also suggested to improve retention and progression of BME police officers, including to the most senior ranks.

These include:

• compulsory training on diversity issues for selection and promotion panel members, including those for specialist posts

• increased use of external assessors from a BME background on selection panels; instituting coaching and mentoring for BME officers

• ensuring that units which deal with complaints from officers on personnel matters receive dedicated training on diversity issues.

The full inquiry report can be accessed at publications.parliament.uk

DiversityPolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 18

PoliceHOC 03/2016 police pension schemes (England and Wales)

The circular provides an update on lifetime allowance and annual allowance charges for police pension schemes in England and Wales.

Please see gov.uk/government

Consultation on APP media relations

The College of Policing is developing authorised professional practice (APP) on media relations and has launched a consultation to obtain feedback on the proposed content. The College will use the consultation to:

• ensure the content is appropriate and useful to practitioners

• invite feedback from the wide range of individuals and organisations who have an interest in supporting professional, transparent and legitimate relationships between the police and the media

• draw on the knowledge, skills and experience of others to enrich the product and ensure that we identify good practice based on the best available evidence.

The APP brings together the College’s 2013 APP with the 2010 guidance developed by the Communications Advisory Group. It also draws on the recommendations of the Leveson Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press, and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary’s (HMIC) report Without Fear or Favour.

New elements include publicising internal investigations and misconduct matters. The APP reinforces guidance around identifying those who are being investigated or are under arrest. This means that unless exceptional circumstances apply, which would require a clear policing purpose, the police will not release names or details which would lead to individuals being identified.

The consultation identifies a number of specific questions, however comments on any individual section of APP are also welcomed. The consultation is open until 8 July 2016. It can be accessed at app.college.police.uk

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 19

Inquiry into the safeguarding of ‘absent’ children

A report has been published by the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Runaway and Missing Children and Adults’. The report, entitled ‘It is good when someone cares’ is the final report of the APPG inquiry into the safeguarding of ‘absent’ children.

Interim guidance on the Management, Recording and Investigation of Missing Persons, published by ACPO and the College of Policing in 2013, contains for following definitions:

• Missing: ‘Anyone whose whereabouts cannot be established and where the circumstances are out of character or the context suggests the person maybe subject of a crime or at risk of harm to themselves or another’.

• Absent: ‘A person not at a place where expected or required to be and there is no apparent risk’.

The report states that the ‘missing’ and ‘absent’ categorisations result in different actions from the police and from children’s services. In ‘missing’ cases the response is active: the police deploy an officer to the reporting person to gather information and make additional enquiries depending on the circumstances of case. When a missing person returns or is found the police will undertake a ‘safe and well’ check and children will be offered a return interview commissioned by their local children’s social care services to identify any possible safeguarding concerns.

In ‘absent’ cases the report states, there is no immediate action and police personnel are not deployed to undertake checks and searches. Police have to agree a strategy with the reporting person (usually a parent or carer) and on return ‘absent’ children are not normally given ‘safe and well’ checks by the police or offered return interviews by children’s services.

The inquiry identified the following number of issues that it states contribute to making the absent category unsafe.

• The lack of data on absent children.

• The risk assessment is not informed by all available intelligence about a child’s life.

• Different interpretations of what ‘no apparent risk’ means and difference in procedure.

• Looked after children.

• Children missing from the family home.

• Follow up on return.

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 20

The report makes a number of key recommendations:

1. The separate ‘absent’ category should be abandoned by the police and missing children should instead receive a proportionate response based on the risks they face. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) should work with the College of Policing to design a response that assesses the level of risk to all missing children as either ‘low’, ‘medium’ or ‘high’. No child should be allowed to be categorised as low risk without prior joint assessment of the risks they face being undertaken by both the police and children’s services.

2. The police and the Home Office should introduce a national database for missing children that allows information to be shared across police lines. This database should be designed not only to provide accurate data about missing children at a national level but also to be a useful and proactive tool for coordinating and intelligently informing missing children investigations. It should include information about previously identified risks, where young people go missing from and to, and whom they go missing with.

3. A national information sharing protocol for missing children and accompanying best practice guidance should be designed by the DfE and the Home Office to allow the police and local authorities to share information about missing children for the purposes of risk assessment and intelligence gathering for ongoing police investigations and safeguarding work. This protocol should address the sharing of information from return interviews.

4. Children who go missing from home should have a ‘nominated person’ appointed to ensure that they are properly safeguarded.

5. HMIC, Ofsted, HMIP, CQC in their joint inspections should include criteria with a focus on data sharing about children who go missing.

The report can be accessed in full at childrenssociety.org.uk

Consultation on definition of ‘missing’

The College of Policing had launched a consultation on proposed revisions to the definition of ‘missing’ in relation to missing persons. In 2015, the College launched a public consultation on draft Authorised Professional Practice (APP) on missing persons. The definitions of the terms ‘missing’ and ‘absent’ drew the most comments. The College is reviewing these definitions as a result of the feedback received, observations from the 2016 HIMC report Missing children: who cares? – the police response to missing and absent children, reports issued by the Children’s Commissioner in 2012 and views expressed by third third-sector organisations at the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for Runaway and Missing Children and Adults.

The consultation closes on 16 June 2016 and can be accessed in full at college.police.uk

PolicePolicing practice

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 21

Criminal justice systemChange to threat level from Northern Ireland related terrorism

The threat level to Great Britain from Northern Ireland related terrorism has been raised from moderate to substantial. The threat level from Northern Ireland related terrorism in Northern Ireland and from international terrorism to the UK as a whole remains unchanged at severe.

Please see gov.uk

New funding for health based places of safety

The government has announced a £15 million fund to provide health and community based places of safety. The intention is that people in crisis, who have not committed a crime, will be prevented from being held in a police cell because health services were not available. The funding can be used to:

• refurbish or improve existing health-based places of safety, for example to increase capacity

• build new places of safety

• make existing places of safety suitable for people aged 18 and under

• create mental health crisis cafes or places of calm

• provide ambulance transport to places of safety (so a police car is not used)

• provide vehicles for mobile services to respond to mental health crises in the community.

There are 10 force areas where the money will be targeted:

• Avon and Somerset

• Cleveland

• Derbyshire

• Devon and Cornwall

• Essex

• Lincolnshire

• Nottinghamshire

• South Yorkshire

• Sussex

• West Yorkshire.

Please see gov.uk

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 22

Non-police organisation use of PNC

HM Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has published reports on the use of the Police National Computer (PNC) by ten non-police organisations, including the Royal Mail, the Environment Agency and the Gangmasters Licensing Authority. The inspections aim to answer three questions:

1. Is the level of access specified in the supply agreement appropriate for the needs of the non-police organisation?

2. Does the non-police organisation comply with the security operating procedures? In particular, are the arrangements for training, physical security, and internal audit compliant with the security operating procedures?

3. Is the non-police organisation making efficient and effective use of the PNC?

Please see justiceinspectorates.gov.uk

Independent review into Sharia law launched

The home secretary launched an independent review into the application of Sharia Law in England and Wales on 26 May 2016.

The purpose of the review is to explore whether, and to what extent, the application of Sharia law may be incompatible with the law in England and Wales. It will examine the ways in which Sharia law may be being misused, or exploited, in a way that may discriminate against certain groups, undermine shared values and cause social harms.

The review is part of the government’s Counter-Extremism Strategy and will be chaired by Professor Mona Siddiqui, an internationally renowned expert in Islamic and inter-religious studies. Professor Siddiqui will lead a panel of experts including experienced family law barrister Sam Momtaz, retired high court judge Sir Mark Hedley and specialist family law lawyer Anne Marie Hutchinson OBE QC. The panel will be advised by two religious and theological experts to ensure the panel has a full and thorough understanding of the religious and theological issues relating to specific aspects of Sharia law, and the way it is applied.

The panel will begin work immediately and is expected to complete its review in 2017. It is expected to issue a call for evidence to provide an opportunity for groups and individuals to contribute to the review.

Criminal justice system

OFFICIALDigest June 2016

© College of Policing (2016)

OFFICIAL 23

Home Secretary Theresa May said:

Many British people of different faiths follow religious codes and practices, and benefit a great deal from the guidance they offer.

A number of women have reportedly been victims of what appear to be discriminatory decisions taken by Sharia councils, and that is a significant concern. There is only one rule of law in our country, which provides rights and security for every citizen.

Professor Siddiqui, supported by a panel with a strong balance of academic, religious and legal expertise, will help us better understand whether and the extent to which Sharia law is being misused or exploited and make recommendations to the government on how to address this.

Chair of the Sharia Law Review, Professor Mona Siddiqui, said:

It’s a privilege to be asked to chair such an important piece of work. At a time when there is so much focus on Muslims in the UK, this will be a wide ranging, timely and thorough review as to what actually happens in Sharia councils.

The news story can be accessed at gov.uk

Criminal justice system

C407|0616BetterEvidence

forBetterPolicing™

About the College

We’re the professional body for everyone who works for the police service in England and Wales. Our purpose is to provide those working in policing with the skills and knowledge necessary to prevent crime, protect the public and secure public trust.

college.police.uk