The High Court has ruled that the blanket disclosure of all convictions where a person has had two previous convictions is unfair. The Court said:
Having reached the conclusion that the Act in its present form fails to meet ECHR requirements “as to the quality of the law”, a decision as to whether the interference with rights under Article 8 is “necessary” does not strictly arise. However, I can see no reason for thinking that the convictions in issue in the present cases before us bear, for the Claimants’ entire lifetimes, a rational relationship with the objects sought to be achieved by the disclosure provisions of the Act, simply because in the case of each Claimant there is more than one conviction. It seems to me that, with respect, the reasoning that appealed to Lord Reed on this point in the unamended scheme seems just as applicable here.
The government is expected to amend their disclosure rules in light of the judgement.
P and A, R (on the application of) v Secretary of State for Justice & Ors