In message <[log in to unmask]>, at
21:28:27 on Thu, 16 Sep 2004, Peter Lane <[log in to unmask]>
writes
>Indeed, the US Embassy and most of the others are insisting on the PNC
>convictions history and my understanding is that illegal or otherwise, when
>the Basic Check is enabled via Part V of the Police Act, they (the US) have
>stated that they will still require to see it - so individuals will be asked
>to 'volunteer' the information - Interesting position for DPO's at that time
>!!!
I don't think I understand this. Surely when someone wants a (say) US
visa today they have to "volunteer" to get (and pay for) the PNC check
done. How does that change when there's a Basic Check that the embassy
chooses to ignore (or maybe it's "ineligible to request"?)
>I view this as at least a breach of the third principle in that as far
>as spent convictions are concerned there is a potential contravention
>of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act. (This issue applies to the
>embassies as well re emigration)
AFAIK, the US Embassy specifically disallows RoOA [it not being a law
with jurisdiction in the USA], and requests information on all
convictions.
--
Roland Perry
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|