Government ministers have stated that police forces should exhibit greater transparency regarding the nationalities of individuals who have been formally charged with offenses.
This declaration follows reports that two men charged in connection with the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl in Warwickshire are Afghan asylum seekers.
While police have not verified these reports, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has criticized their decision to withhold further details, describing it as a “cover-up.”
In response, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has asserted the need for “more transparency” concerning the backgrounds of suspects.
But what legal and procedural frameworks govern the release of such information?
When a police force in England and Wales arrests or charges a suspect, and contemplates releasing information to the media, it must consider two primary factors: laws pertaining to contempt of court, designed to ensure fair trials, and the College of Policing’s guidance on media relations.
Contempt of court laws, in this context, are relatively straightforward. The dissemination of information that could prejudice a future trial, such as details of evidence collected by police, is prohibited.
In most instances, publishing the nationality of a charged individual is unlikely to compromise a fair trial, rendering contempt of court laws generally inapplicable.
The College of Policing guidance presents a more complex framework. Prior to 2012, police forces determined the extent of information released to the media on a case-by-case basis.
These decisions, often nuanced, were predicated on the perceived relevance of the information and, at times, the relationship between the force and individual journalists. However, following the publication of Lord Leveson’s report on press ethics in 2012, police forces adopted a more cautious approach to information disclosure.
This culminated in the College of Policing’s media relations guidance, which stipulates that only the suspect’s gender and age should be released upon arrest (but prior to charge). The guidance remains silent on nationality or asylum status at this stage. Once a suspect is charged, the guidance permits the release of information such as name, date of birth, and address.
While nationality and asylum status remain unaddressed, the guidance states: “The media are aware of automatic reporting restrictions and it is their responsibility to follow them. Any information permitted under such restrictions should be released upon charge, including the following: name, date of birth, address, details of charge, and date of court appearance.”
“The person’s occupation can be released if it is relevant to the crime – for example, a teacher charged with the assault of a pupil at the school where they work.”
Therefore, the guidance neither prohibits nor explicitly permits the release of information regarding the nationality, asylum status, or ethnicity of a charged individual.
In the case of the Warwickshire Police charging of two men in connection with the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl, the force declined to confirm whether the men were asylum seekers.
The force stated: “Once someone is charged with an offence, we follow national guidance. This guidance does not include sharing ethnicity or immigration status.”
While the latter statement is technically accurate, the guidance refrains from offering definitive recommendations on the release of ethnicity or immigration status.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has accused the police of a cover-up.
In response, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on Tuesday: “We do think there should be greater transparency. We do think more information should be provided, including on issues around nationality including on some of those asylum issues.”
The prime minister’s official spokesman had earlier stated: “Our position is that authorities, whether it is the police or whether central government, should be as transparent as possible on these issues.”
Ultimately, the decision regarding what information to release to the media rests largely at the discretion of the police force.
As demonstrated by events in Liverpool in May, police forces will release information about a suspect’s ethnicity even prior to charges being filed when they deem it to be in the public interest. Following a car plowing into crowds celebrating Liverpool FC’s Premiership title victory, Merseyside Police promptly identified the arrested individual as white and British to dispel rumors of a terrorist attack.
The College of Policing stated: “Police forces make challenging and complex decisions on a case-by-case basis and transparency is essential to prevent misinformation and reassure the public.”
It also noted that its guidance was “already under review” and that police forces were considering how to balance their legal obligations with “their responsibility to prevent disorder.”
The issue of what information police can release about a suspect came sharply into focus last summer when Axel Rudakubana was arrested for murdering three young girls, Alice Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, in Southport.
Initially, Merseyside Police withheld information about Rudakubana and his religion, allowing the spread of misinformation claiming he was a Muslim asylum seeker. This disinformation contributed, at least in part, to the riots that occurred last summer. At the time, Merseyside Police cited contempt of court rules as the reason for withholding further information.
The Law Commission has also been examining contempt of court laws, with a review expected to be published next month.
A woman whose twin sister and nieces were shot dead welcomes firearm licensing rules which become law.
The former RAF base had been earmarked by the Conservative government to house asylum seekers.
The earliest that figure has been reached before was in 2022 on 27 August, Home Office data shows.
Migrant numbers are expected to increase to 1,245 at MDP Wethersfield over several weeks.
Fareham and Waterlooville MP Suella Braverman has criticised the plans as “utterly inappropriate”.