The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 (RoOA) is a piece of legislation which allows some types of criminal convictions to be ignored after a period of time has passed (the ‘rehabilitation period’).
After this time, provided the person receives no further convictions for conduct during the period, the conviction can be considered ‘spent’ and the person is considered ‘rehabilitated’ - that is, they do not have to declare it to prospective employers, insurance companies, etc.
There are multiple exemptions to the Act, however; not all convictions are treated in the same way, and convictions with custodial sentences of over four years are not covered by the Act.
In the Undercover Policing Inquiry, the risk assessment process for former undercovers and their managers (part of their anonymity applications) examined the likelihood that the undercovers were at risk of physical violence or harassment from former members of the groups they had infiltrated. To do this, they considered the convictions of those whom the undercover had encountered.
The non-state core participants raised the issue that this potentially breached individual’s rights under the Act. This led to a hearing on 20 November 2017 (Procedural Hearing 7).
In his subsequent ruling of 29 November 2017, the Inquiry Chair, Sir John Mitting, made three findings:
- That he would consider evidence relating to convictions as part of a restriction order application ‘when I consider that justice cannot be done when determining the application except by admitting such evidence’.
- He would not give those whose convictions were being used in this way an opportunity to make any representations.
- He would make a recommendation to the Secretary of State for Justice for an amendment to be made to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 Exceptions Order 1975 which gave inquiries under the Inquiry Act 2006 the necessary exemptions.
A summary of the particular legal issues the Inquiry Chair was seeking views on is covered in the Overview note of 1 March 2017.