Patient confidentiality and data protection should not be routinely used to block reports into mental health homicides, the information watchdog has indicated.
John Edwards, the Information Commissioner, said that “data protection law is not a barrier to sharing necessary information to improve public services and safety, or to providing accountability”.
NHS England had planned to suppress a damning independent report into the attacks by paranoid schizophrenic Valdo Calocane, who fatally stabbed Barnaby Webber and Grace O’Malley-Kumar, both 19, and Ian Coates, 65, in Nottingham in June 2023.
The families of Calocane’s victims were first told they could not see the full report, but the NHS reneged when they signed confidentiality agreements.
NHS England — citing data protection and patient confidentiality — then intended to publish for public view only a summary of about 30 pages which contained very few details about the failings in the case. After this decision was reported on the front page of The Times, NHS England published the whole report with no redactions the next day.
Edwards, whose office regulates data protection legislation and other information rights, said in a statement: “The release of medical information in these sensitive and emotive circumstances requires careful, case-by-case consideration to ensure the right balance is struck between the public interest and the rights of all people involved.
• NHS allowed Nottingham killer Valdo Calocane to skip his medication
“Both data protection and freedom of information laws provide organisations with the framework to assess cases individually and make decisions on publication, as has been the case with this report.
“I can assure people that data protection law is not a barrier to sharing necessary information to improve public services and safety, or to providing accountability when reviewing service performance. It is a framework supporting organisations to reach the right decisions.”
The issue is wider than the Calocane case as NHS England has prevented some other families of victims from seeing full reports about patients who went on to kill. Other families have been given access, but only brief summaries have been published for public view.
Jon Baines, a senior data protection specialist at Mishcon de Reya, said that legislation enabled publication of personal information when there was substantial public interest. The law allowed publication of information that could protect the public from malpractice and failures in services provided.
Baines said: “I’m not saying it’s a straightforward legal question as to whether the report can be published, but an argument can be made that there is a substantial, overriding, public interest in disclosure in order that the public can be aware of any failings and understand what actions are being taken to address them.”
NHS England has said it will review its policy on the publication of independent mental health homicide reports to ensure that it complies with the body’s legal obligations and also acts transparently.
The families of Calocane’s victims will meet Sir Keir Starmer at Downing Street on Wednesday to discuss the many failings in the case. They want a statutory public inquiry that can compel witnesses to give evidence.
