À procura de textos e pretextos, e dos seus contextos.

11/11/2009

15,000 people criminalised by Criminal Records Bureau over past six years

Christopher Hope, Whitehall Editor

There were fears last night that the news could deter innocent people from applying for jobs that need to be scrutinised for fear of being branded a criminal.

Critics said the errors could “cost people [their] jobs and ruin lives“.

Official figures showed that the number of upheld complaints about criminal records checks carried out by the Criminal Records Bureau has more than doubled over the past six years from 1,111 in 2002/3 to a record 2,509 in 2008/9.

In all, 15,320 complaints about criminal records checks have been so far upheld since the CRB was set up in 2002. It is thought a significant number of these related to people wrongly being accused of criminal offences.

Ministers are planning a big increase in the numbers of people who need to be vetted by the CRB. More than 11million adults will have to be checked on a new database which will be run by the Independent Safeguarding Authority (ISA).

The CRB was established by the Home Office in March 2002 to check for people's criminal convictions, cautions and reprimands that is held by police in England and Wales. A separate body carries out checks in Scotland. They are carried out on people who want to work with children or vulnerable adults.

The figures show that number of disputes has increased in step with a boom in the number of people needing to be checked, although the proportion of mistakes compared with the total number of CRB checks carried out has fallen.

Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, told MPs that the disputes with the CRB could be caused by a name and address being mixed up with that of a criminal, the police holding inaccurate information, or identity fraudsters stealing someone’s personal details.

The figure was higher than the number of errors disclosed by the CRB in its annual report in the summer because it includes other mistakes which were not deemed to be as serious.

It also includes errors made by contributors to the checks, such as the police, or disputes where an individual feels that the information is misleading or inaccurate and requires amendment.

Last night Chris Huhne, the LibDems’ home affairs spokesman, said: “Criminal records contain such sensitive information that they must be one hundred per cent accurate.

“It is just as unfair to label someone as criminal if they are innocent as it is to let an offender slip through the net.

“People will be outraged to be branded a criminal simply because they share a name or have been the victim of identity fraud. It could cost people jobs and ruin lives.

Chris Grayling, the shadow Home secretary, added: “If the CRB can't get factual data right, then how on earth can the new agency deal with anecdotal information without the risk of major injustices?

“This will cause huge anxiety to those who will have to be included in the Government's new vetting system, given the fact that it will also deal with hearsay evidence.”

David Green, director of think tank Civitas, added: “The rationale for CRB checks is that the safety of children is so important that we should never take chances. These checks have now been shown to be doubly perverse.

“It has already been found that the system creates a false sense of security by placing reliance on mere paperwork when employers would be better advised to use their personal knowledge and judgement of potential volunteers.

“We now know that thousands of errors have been made, so that potential volunteers, already deterred by the unnecessary bureaucracy, will be further discouraged by fear of false accusation.”

Josie Appleton, from the campaigning group the Manifesto Club, said that part of the problem was that people were making decisions about people’s criminal past based on databases rather than information received in person.

She said: “The more the CRB extends its role the m ore likely errors will be made. These decisions should be made by qualified people on the ground. The idea that people can sit in a room, receive a fax and make a decision is absurd.”

A spokesman for the CRB said that the agency’s work had prevented 100,000 people from working with vulnerable people over the past five years.

He said: “This is not about the CRB making mistakes, information released on a CRB check can be disputed for a number of reasons. Incorrect CRB checks represent a tiny minority of the 3.9 million checks that were carried out last year.

“The Criminal Records Bureau plays a vital role in protecting the most vulnerable in UK by giving employers the extra tools to make informed recruitment decisions.”

www.telegraph.co.uk - 11.11.09

Sem comentários:

Related Posts with Thumbnails