In a court ruling on 19th October 2009, Lord Justice Waller, Hughes and Carnwath of the Court of Appeal decided that over a million minor convictions will remain in the police national computer for up to 100 years.

In so deciding, Lord Justice Waller said that there was reason to believe the retention of these records would bring value to police work and would help in the fight against crime.

The case involved the claim of five individuals whose criminal record checks undertaken in employment applications traced minor offences they had committed many years ago, often as children. One such claimant was found guilty of theft of a 99p packet of meat in 1984 and was fined £15 for it. Another was guilty of a minor assault when under the age of 14 and yet another had been fined £25 over 25 years ago for shoplifting. The Court of Appeal denied the claimants the right to appeal to the Supreme Court.

Ian Readhead, Acpo director of information, commented on the case: "This decision provides valuable clarification on the retention of criminal conviction data on the Police National Computer.

"While this particular case involved five individuals, the ramifications of losing the appeal were potentially huge.

"This data assists police officers in their work in preventing crime and protecting the public and the loss of such valuable information would have been detrimental to that.

"Although principally used for police purposes, these records are also critical to the courts, the Criminal Records Bureau, the Independent Safeguarding Agency, the Crown Prosecution Service and the Home Office, who all supported this appeal."

Probably the most irrational result of this ruling is that details of the offences, no matter how trivial or how long ago committed, can then be shared with other organisations such as the Criminal Records Bureau, which supplies data to employers.

While the reason for holding criminal records is obvious in any modern society, it is worrying to think of the extent these records have into the life of the Everyman, who is now unable to escape scrutiny for follies of his youth. The decision of the Court is also at odds with the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act, whose purpose is to erase minor convictions so that people can go on with their lives and return to society without being forever haunted by their past.

There has been a general criticism of the decision amongst many privacy watchdog organisations, lawyers and academics. Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: 'Criminal records are of operational value to the police but it is hard to explain why keeping records of minor transgressions for 100 years is proportionate.”

Barrister Alex Deane of privacy pressure group Big Brother Watch said, ‘The benefit to the police of retaining the samples is minimal. The cost to the individuals can be huge - and often potentially life-ruining.'

It would seem that the relevant authorities are keen on fighting crime on a grand scale. The question is whether this fight, involving CCTV surveillance, expanding CRB checks for employment purposes and police databases carrying minute information about minor offences committed many decades ago, is not one which turns against the very citizens it claims to be protecting.

This article was written just for information and debate purpose and should not be considered as a legal opinion for any specific business.

2010. All rights reserved for NABAS LEGAL