The Law Lords will hear that Hertfordshire and Sussex Police Forces failed to uphold the “right to life” because of their inaction when two witnesses under threat were ultimately murdered and disabled by their attackers.
Liberty’s Legal Officer Anna Fairclough, who intervened in the case, said:
'The authorities are continually complaining about criminal defendants arguing their human rights; strange that they should resist victims and witnesses’ enjoying protection as well'
The Law Lords will hear the cases of:
● Giles Van Colle, a 25-year-old optometrist from North London, who was shot dead in 2000 by a former employee, Daniel Brougham, after alerting police about the death threats he’d received from Brougham. After stealing optical equipment from several practices, including Van Colle’s, Brougham allegedly set fire to witnesses’ private property and made death threats by phone to Van Colle. Despite Van Colle’s repeatedly alerting the Hertfordshire Police Authority, the officer on the case failed to arrest Brougham or put Van Colle into witness protection before he was shot dead.
● Steven Smith was attacked with a claw-hammer by his former partner, Gareth Jeffrey, after reporting Jeffrey’s hundreds of violent threats to police on no less than five occasions. Texts and internet messages he received included “U are dead” and “I am looking to kill you and no compromises.” Smith suffered serious and lasting physical and psychological injuries.
The Law Lords appeal is being brought by the Chief Constable of Hertfordshire Police, as the Van Colle family have won their previous cases in the High Court and Court of Appeal. The Chief Constable of Sussex Police appeals against the Court of Appeal's decision to reinstate Steven Smith's claim in negligence which had been struck out by the county court.
The intervention filed by Liberty, Inquest, Justice and Mind argues that as agents of the state, police authorities have a ‘positive obligation’ under Article 2 (the right to life) of the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act. The police must therefore take operational measures to protect the life of individuals from a risk posed by a third person.
Contact Jen Corlew on 0207 378 3656 or 07973 831 128 NOTES TO EDITORS
1. On 19 May 2008 the Law Lords will hear the case of Chief Constable of Hertfordshire Police v. Van Colle and another and Chief Constable of Sussex Police and Steven Smith. The judgment will be reserved.
2. Since the case of Hill v Chief Constable of Yorkshire Police (1989) AC 53, in which the mother of one of the Yorkshire Ripper's victims attempted to sue the police for negligently failing to apprehend him, it has not generally been possible to bring a negligence action against the police for operational failures in a criminal investigation. The courts determined that it would not serve the interests of public policy to open the police to potential negligence claims since that might force them to act defensively and might divert resources from the work of policing. However, since the advent of the Human Rights Act 1998 and following a
Strasbourg case called Osman v UK (1999), claims based on similar facts can succeed on human rights grounds even when they cannot be brought in negligence. Osman concerned the police's failure to arrest a school teacher who had become disturbingly obsessed with a student who he eventually killed. Although Osman established that the police could owe a legally enforceable duty under Article 2 (right to life) where they 'knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to the life of an identified individual and failed to take steps reasonably open to them which might reasonably have been expected to avoid the risk', on the facts of Osman there was found to be no breach. The case of Smith presently before the House of Lords will examine the relationship between these two possible causes of action: Van Colle was brought purely on human rights grounds, but Smith was argued only in negligence since Mr. Smith's case was brought after the one year time limit under the Human Rights Act 1998 had expired.
3. Download a copy of Liberty’s briefing
The Human Rights Act: Exploding the Myths.
