Teenager loses bid to prevent police using images of rioting children
A teenager has lost a Supreme Court fight over the police’s use of images of children suspected of being involved in riots or of causing criminal damage in Derry.
Lawyers representing the teenager said he had been arrested following sectarian disorder in Derry four years ago.
And they claimed that the publication of ”naming and shaming” images, in newspapers and police leaflets, could be a human rights breach.
Justices said CCTV images were taken of the teenager "in the course of rioting" and later published in newspapers as part of a police campaign designed to identify people involved.
They said publication did interfere with the teenager’s right to a private life but said that interference was justified because it was necessary for the administration of justice and was not excessive.
The teenager, now 18, had asked the UK's highest court to consider the issue after the Northern Ireland High Court ruled that police had not interfered with his right to private life - which is enshrined in human rights legislation - in 2013.
Supreme Court justices, who said the teenager could not be identified in media reports, unanimously dismissed his appeal.
Supreme Court justices considered whether police should be allowed to publish such images at a hearing in London in November – and delivered their ruling today.
A panel of justices analysed argument from legal teams representing the teenager and the PSNI.
The teenager had asked the UK’s highest court to consider the issue after the Northern Ireland High Court ruled that police had not interfered with his right to private life – which is enshrined in human rights legislation.
Justices said the teenager could not be identified in media reports.
Barrister Mary Higgins QC, for the teenager – who was 13 at the time of the disorder – had told the Supreme Court that children were given ”special protection by the law” because they were the ”most vulnerable” members of society.
”(He) invites this court to find that except where absolutely necessary to prevent serious harm, and then as a last resort, the image of a juvenile should never be published by the police in the press as a means of identifying them because this names, shames and stigmatises them,” she told justices.
”(He) invites the court to find that the correct balance was not struck between the public interest in law enforcement and the protection of (his) rights.”
Police bosses disputed the teenager’s claim.
They said images were captured for the purpose of identifying people involved in criminal activity.
And they said the images they were not disseminated for any purpose other than the legitimate policing purpose of the prevention and detection of crime.
