Implications of Police Guidance on Revealing Suspects’ Ethnicity
What are the implications for defendents following changes to police guidance
Police forces in England and Wales have been given interim guidance encouraging them to consider disclosing the ethnicity and nationality of suspects charged in high-profile cases.
The new rules, issued by the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), follow growing criticism over inconsistent approaches to releasing such details and the rise of misinformation online.
As criminal defence solicitors, we stress that while transparency is important, the release of personal details must always be balanced against a suspect’s right to a fair trial and protection from prejudice.
Why the Guidance Has Changed
The NPCC said the aim is to limit the spread of misinformation that can fuel public disorder, as seen during the riots in 2024 following the Southport murders. In that case, false claims about the suspect’s background circulated widely, contributing to violence and unrest.
Conversely, in Liverpool earlier that year, Merseyside Police quickly clarified that a man arrested after driving into a crowd was a white British national, which helped quell speculation of terrorism. The NPCC argues that consistency in releasing information could prevent similar situations escalating in future.
What the Law Currently Says
Under existing guidance, there is no legal barrier to police releasing information about a suspect’s nationality, ethnicity, or immigration status once they have been charged.
However, there has never been a requirement to disclose such details, leaving the decision at the discretion of each force.
The new advice suggests that in cases where speculation poses risks to public safety, such details should be disclosed. But decisions will still be case-specific, and subject to wider legal and ethical considerations.
Concerns from a Defence Perspective
While transparency can reduce rumours, disclosure raises several legal and ethical issues:
- Prejudice in trials: Revealing a suspect’s ethnicity or immigration status may fuel bias among jurors or the public, undermining the presumption of innocence.
- Consistency problems: If details are released in some cases but withheld in others, speculation may increase, not decrease.
- Human rights implications: Public identification based on ethnicity or nationality risks reinforcing stereotypes and could breach Article 6 (fair trial) and Article 14 (prohibition of discrimination) under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Reactions and Risks
The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, welcomed the guidance as a step toward “greater transparency”. The government has also asked the Law Commission to explore how more information might be released without prejudicing criminal trials.
But former senior officers, including ex-Met Chief Superintendent Dal Babu, have warned of “unintended consequences”, suggesting the guidance may place police in a “damned if they do, damned if they don’t” position.
Defence Lawyers’ Position
As defence solicitors, our primary concern is safeguarding the right to a fair and impartial trial. Transparency has value, but it must not come at the expense of justice. Releasing details such as ethnicity and immigration status can create a climate of bias before a trial even begins.
Ultimately, any disclosure must be handled with care, applied consistently, and always weighed against the fundamental principle that all defendants are innocent until proven guilty.
How We Can Help
If you have any questions about the change in police guidance and the potential impact on your legal representation – our experts are hand to help. Call us 0161 477 1121 or Message Us to speak to one of our team.
