An End to Indefinite Notification Requirements without Review for Sex Offenders?
| Published date | 01 December 2009 |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.2009.73.6.602 |
| Date | 01 December 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Comment |
COMMENT
An End to Indefinite Notification
Requirements without Review for Sex
Offenders?
Christopher Rose*
Keywords Sex offenders; Notification requirements; Sexual Offences
Act 2003; Polygraph testing
This comment looks at the recent judgments of the Court of Appeal and
the Divisional Court in R (on the application of JF and Thompson) v Secretary
of State for the Home Department1and the implications that they have for
defendants convicted of sexual offences who are subject to the notifica-
tion requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003—commonly
referred to as the Sex Offenders Register—for an indefinite period, with
no recourse to any review. The proceedings considered whether it was
proportionate for defendants to remain subject to the notification re-
quirements without any scope for review and both the Divisional Court
and the Court of Appeal concluded that it was not. Declarations of
incompatibility were made in respect of the claimants so that the gov-
ernment must now legislate to incorporate into the Act a system of
review. The comment concludes by looking beyond the judgments to
potential methods of review, including a recent government pilot into
the use of polygraph testing.
JF had been convicted of offences of rape and sexual activity with a
child when aged 11. He was sentenced to 30 months’ detention under
the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, s. 91. Thompson
had been convicted of offences of indecent assault and had been sen-
tenced to five years’ imprisonment. Each, consequently, had been made
subject to the notification requirements contained within the 2003 Act
for the rest of their lives.
The legislative provisions
The notification regime for sex offenders predates the 2003 Act. It was
introduced by the Sex Offenders Act 1997, amended by the Criminal
Justice and Courts Services Act 2000 before being replaced by a new
regime contained within Part 2 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003.
Sections 80–92 of the 2003 Act deal with the notification require-
ments. A person convicted of an offence specified in Sched. 3 to the Act,
which covers the majority of offences contained within both the 2003
* Senior Lecturer at Northumbria University and Barrister of the North Eastern
Circuit; e-mail: christopher.rose@northumbria.ac.uk.
1 [2009] EWCA Civ 792, CA (Civ Div), [2008] EWHC 3170 (Admin).
480 The Journal of Criminal Law (2009) 73 JCL 480–487
doi:10.1350/jcla.2009.73.6.602
To continue reading
Request your trial