Exclusive: Details of thousands referred to programme can be viewed without their knowledge

This article is more than 11 months old

This article is more than 11 months old

Counter-terror police across the UK have been running a secret database containing details of thousands of individuals referred to the government’s controversial anti-radicalisation Prevent programme, the Guardian can reveal.

The National Police Prevent Case Management (PCM) database is managed centrally by national counter-terrorism policing headquarters. It is accessible to all police forces across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, and the Home Office are able to request data from it, according to documents sent to the human rights group Liberty and seen by the Guardian.

The stated aim of Prevent, a voluntary programme, is to divert people from terrorism before they offend and crucially deals with individuals who have yet to cross the criminality threshold.

'My son was terrified': how Prevent alienates UK Muslims Read more

Each Prevent referral received is added to the PCM database by individual police forces, including personal details and reasons for the referral, but the person is not notified, responses to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests submitted by Liberty showed. Other agencies are able to request information held on the database.

The revelations about the existence of the database come at a time when Prevent is facing renewed scrutiny as an independent review begins, sparked by years of accusations that the programme had become a toxic brand that disproportionately targeted Muslims.

Police chiefs said recording referrals ensured accountability and allowed forces to understand when vulnerabilities are increasing.

Gracie Bradley, Liberty policy and campaigns manager, said: “This secret database isn’t about keeping us safe. It’s about keeping tabs on and controlling people – particularly minority communities and political activists.

“It is utterly chilling that potentially thousands of people, including children, are on a secret government database because of what they’re perceived to think or believe.”

Any rank of police officer or staff can access the database but users must be Prevent practitioners, who are vetted and given training prior to access.

Chief constables are the designated data controllers within their respective forces.

The exact number of individuals on the database is currently unknown but forces that responded to Liberty’s request for information said all referrals were added at the time of receipt and official statistics show that 21,042 individuals have been referred in the three years to March 2018 alone.

In the most recent year available, 2017/18, a total of 7,318 individuals were subject to a referral but 3,096 or 42% left the process requiring no further action and 3,466 left the process and were signposted to alternative services.

The majority – 4,144 or 57% – were aged 20 years or under. Within this figure, 2,009 were under 15 and 2,135 were aged 15 to 20.

Ultimately, only 394 were escalated to the Channel process, which provides specialist support to people who were deemed at risk of being drawn into terrorism following a number of assessments.

Police Prevent practitioners also have access to the Channel Management Information System which is a database of Prevent Channel cases, the responses said. CMIS is owned and managed by the Home Office.

Information on the database is derived from referrals made by public servants like teachers and doctors as well as police, who are compelled to monitor and report signs of what they believe could indicate extremism under a controversial statutory duty.

In its response, the Met police said an individual can challenge the decision and have their details removed but the challenge may not always be successful depending on the circumstances.

However, the force did not elaborate on how that would be possible given that individuals are not aware their details are entered on the database.

Harun Khan, secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “That a database is being compiled by police forces detailing every Prevent referral is deeply worrying. That it is secret is even more concerning.

“This database – over and above being a hugely authoritarian tool – will mean that the vast majority of those referred, who are found to have no terrorism link, will still be perceived as potential risks by the state, and this will disproportionately affect Muslims.

“Our questions on transparency, accountability and oversight around Prevent now become even more important.”

The independent review of Prevent, announced in January, attracted controversy itself when it emerged the man appointed to lead the exercise, Lord Carlile, had admitted to parliament that he “may be somewhat biased towards” the programme and had pledged his “considered and strong support” to it, prompting calls for him to step down.

Further criticism was triggered by the terms of reference for the review, published last month, which suggested the exercise would not “consider past decisions” made under the programme.

Lord Carlile sought to reassure critics by claiming that “everything is up for discussion, including scrapping” the programme.

One of four strands of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy known as Contest, Prevent was created by the Labour government in 2003 and its remit was widened by the coalition government in 2011. The statutory duty on schools, NHS trusts, prisons and local authorities to report concerns about people who may be at risk of turning to extremism or terrorism was introduced in 2015.

A National Police Chiefs’ Council spokesman said: “The public would expect the police to maintain professional records of those individuals referred for support as potential victims of radicalisation. This is no different to the way we record other forms of supportive safeguarding activity such as child sexual exploitation, domestic abuse or human trafficking.

“Good records ensure we are accountable, allow us to understand when vulnerabilities are increasing, and ensure we act consistently and proportionately, only taking action in those cases where our support is necessary.

“If we did not maintain proper, legally compliant records, the public would rightly have far less confidence in the police.”