Police can unveil suspects' ethnicity in high profile cases to prevent riots

Police forces across England and Wales have been told to release the ethnicity and nationality of a suspect when it could reduce the risk of disorder. The new landmark guidelines come after police were criticised last summer for releasing minimal information on Southport murderer Axel Rudakubana, which sparked violent riots.

Top officers can now decide to release the suspect's details when false information is circulating or there is high public interest. However, they will not verify their immigration status as this is information held by the Home Office.

As reported by the Daily Mail, Merseyside Police were criticised for a lack of transparency last summer following the arrest of Rudakubana. False rumours spread online about his ethnicity, leading to violent disorder and unrest across the nation.

Before the new interim guidance from the National Police Chiefs' Council was introduced, police forces provided just the age of a suspect after they're arrested, as well as where and when they were detained. After the suspect is charged, their name, date of birth and address is released.

Deputy chief constable Sam de Reya, of the National Police Chiefs' Council, said: "We saw during last summer's disorder, as well as in several recent high-profile cases, what the major, real-world consequences can be from what information police release into the public domain.

"We have to make sure our processes are fit for purpose in an age of social media speculation and where information can travel incredibly quickly across a wide range of channels.

"Disinformation and incorrect narratives can take hold in a vacuum. It is good police work for us to fill this vacuum with the facts about issues of wider public interest.

"Our aim with this guidance is to provide greater consistency with how we report this information. Being as fair, consistent and transparent as we can will improve confidence in policing as the definitive source of this information - making all our communities safer in the process."

A shift in police tactics was evident when Merseyside Police acted quickly to confirm that a "53-year-old white British man from the Liverpool area" had been arrested after a car ploughed into crowds at the Liverpool FC victory parade in May. They purposely released the ethnicity and nationality of the suspect to avoid speculation on social media.

Sir Andy Marsh, chief executive of the College of Policing, said: "That was a good decision and good practice by Merseyside Police. Forces are empowered to release information in this way if it serves a policing purpose."

He added: "These guidelines are about suspects who have been charged but this is a substantial step by the police towards being as open and transparent as possible, in a way that doesn't affect the right to a fair trial, so we can maintain public trust, tackle disinformation and minimise community tensions that arise out of that.

"What we can't do is release everyone's information that we don't own, that isn't verified. And the release of this information must serve a policing purpose, not purely to satisfy the curiosity of people who would like to know."

It was concluded by an independent watchdog in March that failure to share basic facts about Rudakubana created "dangerous fictions" which spared the riots. The Crime Reporters Association and the Society of Editors have long fought for greater openness and transparency from police forces.

A Home Office spokesman said: "The public, and police forces themselves, want greater clarity on when, why and how information is released and the legitimate and compelling reasons it may need to be withheld,' they said.

"The Home Office will support that effort by authorising the release of relevant accompanying immigration information in future cases, where it is appropriate to do so, and where the police have requested it. All cases will of course take account of consultation with the police and CPS.

"The government also asked the Law Commission at the end of February to speed up the elements of its review around the law of contempt in relation to what can be said publicly ahead of a trial.'

"The government also asked the Law Commission at the end of February to speed up the elements of its review around the law of contempt in relation to what can be said publicly ahead of a trial."