HUMAN rights campaigners say a Supreme Court ruling that people no longer need to disclose minor childhood offences is an "injection of proportionality" into the criminal records system.
Five Supreme Court justices yesterday concluded that a man's right to a private life had been breached when he was forced to reveal a childhood police caution for cycle theft to a prospective employer.
Campaign group Liberty said the ruling was a move towards a balanced system.
The Equality and Human Rights Commission said the Supreme Court had "sensibly recognised" that people should not be "haunted forever" by childhood offences.
Home Secretary Theresa May and Justice Secretary Chris Grayling had asked Supreme Court justices to consider whether disclosure requirements were compatible with human rights legislation after three appeal judges in London had said legislation requiring job applicants to disclose all convictions was a breach of human rights law. Yesterday's Supreme Court hearing upheld that decision.
Mrs May and Mr Grayling introduced amendments to legislation in the wake of the Court of Appeal ruling but maintained the appeal court decision was wrong.
"Finally an injection of proportionality into our criminal records system," said Liberty's legal director, James Welch. "Rules which allowed for blanket disclosure left no room for common sense and let irrelevant and unreliable information ruin lives.
"Of course appropriate checks must be made but today's judgment moves us towards a system that strikes a balance between protecting the vulnerable and ensuring that people with minor convictions can put their pasts behind them."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article