Analysing government data for 43 forces uncovered significant differences in response rates to Clare’s Law applications. Some forces disclose in response to 75% of requests, many to less than 30%, and at least one, to as little as 5%.
Since 2014, the police in England and Wales have had powers to warn someone when they know their partner poses a real risk of danger, under what is known as Clare’s Law (the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme).
Police can also offer the information if they identify a person at risk. Disclosures can include any kind of information held in police records that indicates a risk of abuse.
In early January 2024, journalist Shanti Das reported that some forces are refusing to release such information. Analysing government data for 43 forces, Das uncovered significant differences in response rates to Clare’s Law applications. Some forces disclose in response to 75% of requests, many to less than 30%, and at least one, to as little as 5%.
My research shows that being given this kind of information can be invaluable to victims of domestic abuse, because of the way perpetrators use secrecy and lies to exert control.
Why Clare’s Law disclosures can be life changing for victims
Each time a serial perpetrator starts a new relationship, they spin a false narrative about their past, using secrecy and lies to exert control. This might involve explaining away rumours or reports of past abuse as malicious allegations by a “crazy” ex-partner, or pretending previous convictions are for shoplifting, say, or self-defence.
As the relationship develops and the abuse begins, perpetrators use psychological manipulation to blame their partner for their own behaviour – telling them that they deserve the abuse or that they made it happen.
Police often hold multiple reports of the same kind of abuse from different victims of the same perpetrator – sometimes over many years.
“Look what you made me do” is a phrase that exemplifies how perpetrators twist and distort the truth to expand their scope for control over their victim’s lives and minds.
The value of Clare’s Law lies in its potential to counter these aspects of abuse. Police often hold multiple reports of the same kind of abuse from different victims of the same perpetrator – sometimes over many years. Revealing these distinct patterns of abuse can disprove and disrupt the perpetrator’s narrative.
More importantly, it can expose them for what they are: not a misunderstood or troubled person doing their best, but a serial perpetrator with a distinct repertoire of cruelty that they repeatedly inflict on partner after partner.
Responding to information requests is expensive
The police receive a domestic-abuse-related call every 30 seconds. Domestic abuse accounts for a third of violent crime. Despite police leaders agreeing that it is one of their top priorities, some forces make hardly any disclosures under Clare’s Law. Why?
The first reason is, unsurprisingly, resources. At least three forces have told me that they have reduced or stopped promoting Clare’s Law simply because they cannot cope with the backlog.
That requirement has been made without the Government providing the police with any extra funds to meet it. This matters because responding to a request is resource intensive.
Between 2021 and 2023, police in England and Wales received nearly 84,000 requests for disclosure. Essex police, a medium-sized force, currently has a dedicated team of 20 officers working to respond to these requests.
This significant pressure on forces is only intensified by the Home Office requirement that the disclosure be completed within 28 days of an application being made – down from 35 days in 2022. Failure to meet this target sees the force get marked down by the HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services.
But that requirement has been made without the Government providing the police with any extra funds to meet it. This matters because responding to a request is resource intensive.
Some people have long and varied criminal histories. Police databases, however, don’t allow officers to search within that history for domestic abuse. So officers have to look at every single recorded incident to see if it is related to domestic abuse, or otherwise indicates a relevant risk.
The process is further complicated by jurisdiction. If relevant events in a person’s history occurred when they lived in another force area, the officer may need to call that force and ask them to do an additional search.
Interpretation and data sharing difficulties
Another related problem is that, though disclosures can be made to anyone deemed at risk, some forces interpret this very narrowly. They only disclose information to someone who is living with the person of interest, or currently in a relationship with that person.
This is despite it being a well-established fact that, in situations of domestic abuse, the risks escalate when a relationship is ending. Disclosing information at this point can reassure victims that they made the right decision to leave – and help them to stay away.
Also, police forces can be wary of sharing data – concerned about litigation from angry perpetrators.
My initial findings show that some police forces say they will only make a disclosure if the applicant reports their partner as a criminal. Other applicants describe being made to ‘prove’ they are still at risk.
However, very few domestic abuse crimes reported to the police result in a conviction. As a result, these forces will inevitably have very low disclosure rates. And that’s because they are refusing to disclose relevant information about people they know to be dangerous.
This puts victims at risk by reassuring them, falsely, that there is nothing to disclose. Yet, to my knowledge, not a single legal claim on grounds of privacy violation or otherwise has been brought successfully against police in the decade since Clare’s Law was introduced. Police need to stop worrying about data protection and litigation, and focus on protecting victims.
A third and more concerning reason relates to cultural resistance, among some officers, to the police leadership’s decision to treat domestic abuse as a serious crime and a policing priority.
In 2023 the Casey investigation into the culture at the Met police found the country’s largest police force to be institutionally misogynist. It is unlikely to be the only one.
I am conducting a national survey of people who have accessed Clare’s Law. My initial findings show that some police forces say they will only make a disclosure if the applicant reports their partner as a criminal. Other applicants describe being made to “prove” they are still at risk.
Others still say police told them that if they have experienced abuse themselves, then they already know they are at risk and don’t need the information. Only rigorous recruitment into domestic abuse roles, proper training and strictly enforced lines of accountability can start to address this deeper problem.
This article first appeared on The Conversation, and is republished under a Creative Commons Licence; you can read the original here.
Picture © Yannick Martinez / Shutterstock
