Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage

Debate contribution by Mr Maurice Bradley on 2 June 2026.

MLA: Mr Maurice Bradley
Party at the time: Democratic Unionist Party
Date: 2 June 2026
Type: Debate contribution
Business: Executive Committee Business
Heading: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Assembly identifier: Official Report component 5584504

Text

The more Members who spoke, the more pages I folded up and put into my wee book. Thank you very much. As a member of the Justice Committee, I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on this group of amendments, which relate to biometric data, police photographs and the wider framework governing the retention of personal information by law enforcement agencies. I recognise the input that the Minister and her Department have had through the amendments to the Bill that they have tabled. The issues before us today engage some of the most important principles in our justice system. On the one hand, there is a legitimate expectation that police and prosecuting authorities should have access to the tools necessary to prevent crime, protect the public and bring offenders to justice, but, on the other hand, there is an equally important obligation to ensure that the collection, retention and use of personal information is proportionate, transparent and consistent with individual rights and freedoms. Evidence taken throughout the Committee's consideration of the Bill repeatedly highlighted the need to strike the correct balance between those competing interests. Public confidence depends not only on effective policing but on the existence of clear safeguards, independent oversight and public accountability. Many of the amendments in the group are technical and consequential and are designed to improve the operation of the legislative framework. Others raise more substantive questions about the retention of biometric material relating to children and young people, the role of independent oversight, the treatment of restorative justice outcomes, rights of notification and appeal and the future regulation of police photographs. As we consider the amendments, several key questions should guide our deliberations. Does the framework support effective policing and public protection? Does it provide appropriate safeguards against unnecessary retention? Does it recognise the interests of victims as well as the rights of individuals? Ultimately, will it command the confidence of the public, whom we are here to serve? Those are not straightforward issues, nor should they be approached simplistically. The House must seek a balanced and workable framework that protects public safety and fundamental rights. At a time when policing faces increasing challenges from serious organised crime, paramilitary activity and emerging technological threats, it is essential that we do not inadvertently weaken the legitimate investigative tools available to the PSNI. Equally, where the state retains highly sensitive personal information, there must be a clear safeguards, robust oversight and public accountability. The challenge before the House is to ensure that both those objectives are achieved. With those considerations in mind, I will address amendment No 40, which is important. I must confess that I have a digital archive that goes back to 2005, a digital negative archive that goes back to 1972 and a personal archive that goes back to the late 1800s, so I am aware of how archives work. Amendment No 40 addresses an issue that has attracted increasing attention over recent years, namely the retention, use and destruction of photographs held by enforcement agencies. Given developments in technology and the growing public concerns surrounding privacy and data protection, it is reasonable that a clear statutory framework be developed. I welcome the Department's consultation with key bodies, including the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), the Human Rights Commission and the Justice Committee. Any future framework must strike the correct balance between protecting privacy rights and ensuring that law enforcement agencies retain the tools necessary to investigate crime and protect the public. It is particularly important that any regulations are workable in practice and do not unintentionally hinder legitimate policing activity. Overall, the amendments engage with important questions of transparency, oversight, public protection and confidence in the justice system. As with all amendments, the challenge before the House is to ensure that the appropriate safeguards exist while preserving the PSNI's operational effectiveness and maintaining a strong focus on victims and public safety. While I support the principle of greater clarity on the retention and use of photographs, we must ensure that any future regulatory framework does not become so restrictive that it limits the ability of the PSNI to investigate crime properly. The public expect robust safeguards, but they also expect the police to have the tools necessary to identify offenders, protect victims and keep communities safe. I look forward to the continuing debate on the Justice Bill and the amendments.

729 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Awaiting analysis

This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification