animal offenders register (aor)
our proposal
Read our full policy proposal for the Animal Offenders Register HERE
.png)
Part 1
Verify Humanity proposes the creation of a restricted access Animal Offenders Register (AOR) within the Police National Computer. This would keep a record of individuals convicted, cautioned, reprimanded or warned of wildlife, and
all animal-related offences.
Part 2
When linked with a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check, the AOR would prevent those convicted of neglect or cruelty to animals from buying, keeping or caring for them in the future. There would be restricted access to the AOR ensuring that relevant information is shared lawfully, proportionately and with the right bodies at the right time.
LAWFUL AND PROPORTIONATE
The Animal Offenders Register coupled with restricted DBS checks would be an easy system to integrate as they mirror the already existing Sex Offenders Register and DBS check.
Using this already tried and tested system would ensure that access to sensitive data is restricted to prevent vigilantism.
The AOR and DBS system would be lawful, proportionate and carried out with the appropriate bodies at the correct time.
IMPACT ON HUNTING
This will stop those with a proven record of animal cruelty in Trail Hunting from regaining access to Drag and Clean Boot hunts. This could include positions such as the Master of the hounds, the Hunt Secretary and even riders who join a Hunt.
The AOR could also be used to verify applicants seeking land-use permission for hunts.
The establishment of the AOR will incentivise individuals in Drag and Clean Boot hunts to act within the law, as a potential ban could be a greater deterrent than fines.
It will also aid Drag and Clean Boot hunts, councils, and the police in enforcing the law.
Questions posed to Parliament
Question 1. Disqualification Orders
We are concerned that a lack of guidance in judicial rulings has limited the number and severity of animal disqualification orders. Over the last 10 years, what percentage of guilty animal offenders were issued disqualification orders compared to those who were not issued disqualification orders, and how long did those orders last?
Question 2. Data Sharing
While the Police National Computer provides a database of animal offenders, we are concerned that information about these offenders is not being shared with those who need to make informed decisions about whether a person should buy, keep, or care for animals. What percentage of requests for animal offender information on the Police National Computer are shared with concerned third parties (e.g., rehoming charities), and what percentage are rejected/dismissed?
Question 3. Repeat Offenders
How often do animal offenders commit further offences against animals in Great Britain? And what percentage of these people were issued, or were not issued disqualification orders?