The JCHR is a Parliamentary Committee which considers whether draft laws comply with the European Convention on Human Rights and other human rights legislation. And on the draft Identity Cards bill, it is concerned about compatibility with the Convention's rights to respect for private life and to non-discrimination.
The draft bill, published by the Government in November, includes proposals for a database to be kept containing detailed personal information on cardholders. It could potentially create an electronic fingerprint of everyone who uses a service, such as the NHS, that requires an ID card check.
Experts and civil liberties groups are outraged by the plan, which they see as rushed, over-reaching and damaging to human rights.
The Government disagrees and in November, when publishing the Bill, the then Home Secretary David Blunkett issued a statement confirming that the draft legislation was compatible with the European Convention. He did not, however, provide any reasoning for that statement – an omission condemned by the JCHR today.
"We consider the absence of such explanation to be deeply unsatisfactory in a Bill which is concerned throughout with issues of personal privacy, and with the delicate balances to be struck between individual rights to private life and the protection of the community," says the report.
The JCHR then highlights concerns with the bill itself:
- The extent to which personal information will be regarded as a "registrable fact", and required to be held on the register. The JCHR questions whether all the information "serves a legitimate aim, and is proportionate to the aim" – in particular proposals to retain records "of each occasion on which a person's entry in the Register has been accessed by others, a provision which is potentially highly intrusive of privacy, if the information is disclosed to third parties."
- The possibility of personal information being recorded without the knowledge or consent of person involved.
- The possibility of ID cards becoming effectively compulsory for persons who are required to hold "designated documents" such as passports or residence permits.
- The possibility that a "phased in" compulsory registration system – where defined groups are obliged to have an ID card – may interfere with the rights to privacy and non-discrimination without justification.
- When the scheme becomes compulsory, the extent to which personal information may be disclosed from the Register to a service provider in order to allow access to public services, and the lack of safeguards against unnecessary disclosure.
- The potential, when the scheme becomes compulsory, to make services or contracts conditional on an ID card or access to the Register without sufficient safeguards. The report notes: "Although information from an individual's entry on the Register can only be accessed with his or her consent, this consent may be notional where a person may be unable enter into contracts or access services without giving consent."
- The provision for extensive data sharing from both public and private sectors – the JCHR has asked Government to detail the range of circumstances in which this may take place.
- The extensive provision given for information to be disclosed to public bodies for a wide number or reasons – which can be extended by regulation – without sufficient safeguards.
The JCHR has written to the new Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, highlighting its concerns and will reconsider the issues on receipt of his response.