Releasing suspects without bail is often dangerous – the government needs to work on a solution

The Home Office has finally announced a review into pre-charge bail but there is still a lack of clarity over its scope, writes Bambos Charalambous

There has been a huge drop in the use of conditional bail in recent years (Britpix/Alamy)

One of the four options open to police releasing a suspect from custody is to release them under investigation. Release Under Investigation (RUI) came in under the Policing and Crime Act in April 2017.

It’s not bail – there is no time limit, no return date and no conditions. It was designed that way to be a distinct alternative to bail and in response to concerns raised around investigations such as Operation Yewtree. The sexual abuse investigation was criticised when some suspects were left on bail for long periods before being told they would not face charges.

Before the 2017 changes, suspects were remaining on conditional bail for long spells, causing concern about infringements to their liberty and hindering long-term plans.

Since the reforms, there has been a huge drop in the use of conditional bail while the use of RUI has rocketed. In London, the number of suspects released on bail between 2016 and 2017 was 67,838. This plummeted to just 988 from 2017 to 2018, while the number of RUI cases rose to 46,674 during the same period.

Investigations can take months or even years because of depleted police resources, and suspects need criminal legal aid for much longer. There is a huge risk of releasing people who are a danger to the public. There are no conditions on where they go, who they contact or when they must report back to police. The National Police Chiefs’ Council has issued guidance to frontline officers, stressing the importance of using bail in high harm cases because of the risky over-reliance on RUI.

Just as victims can feel anxious and threatened when a suspect is released into the community without any certainty about what will happen next, so too can those who are wrongly accused. The balance of natural justice must be right to prevent innocent suspects from being punished.

But when the somewhat patchy data – from only 20 of the 44 police forces in England and Wales – shows that 93,098 of the 322,250 RUI cases between April 2017 and October 2019 were people accused of committing a violent or sexual offence, alarm bells must start to ring.

Most victims of rape not only know their attacker but are also often an intimate partner, putting them at greater risk of reprisal. This is why the End Violence Against Women Coalition has warned that releasing suspects under investigation instead of with bail can pose a severe risk to the safety of victims and the public, recommending a presumption of bail with conditions in domestic and sexual violence cases.

A case study from the Centre for Women’s Justice police super-complaint detailed the story of a woman who was held hostage for five hours in the night, cut with broken glass and tied to a table by her ex-husband after he was released with no conditions following interview. He had been interviewed over his repeated raping of her during their 13-year marriage.

The Home Office has finally announced a review into pre-charge bail – but there is still a problem. With very little information in Priti Patel’s announcement and no clarity about the scope of the review, I am struggling to find a commitment and clear intention to address this scandal.

I am pushing for the review to involve the Ministry of Justice and to dig deep into the reasons behind the sharp rise in RUI. They must demand brutally efficient and standardised data collection from all police forces, seriously consider time limits and conditions, give proper resources to police forces and the Crown Prosecution Service, and protect victims of sexual and domestic violence by not allowing their abusers unlimited freedom to repeat their pernicious crimes.

Bambos Charalambous is the Labour MP for Enfield Southgate