The subcommittee had to substantially change its direction from developing policy to articulating best privacy practices that state and local justice agencies could use to develop their own policies.
The first draft of the policy attempted to address the collection, use, sharing, and retention of personally identifying information about suspects, arrestees, convicted persons, probationers, prisoners, parolees (i.e., those on supervised release), victims, and witnesses. The draft attempted to address the group's concerns as stated in the Issues document by making logical expansions of existing protections and adopting some ideas implemented by other jurisdictions - all properly footnoted and discussed in a commentary under each section.
The result was a substantial change in the subcommittee's direction from developing policy to articulating best privacy practices that state and local justice agencies could use to develop their own policies. The thought was that providing uniform guidance would result in substantially similar privacy protections across the state. Additionally, compilations of best practices, especially those developed with diverse stakeholder input, have a tendency to become standards of care. Developing best practices also freed participants to discuss issues without fear of binding their agencies to rules developed by the subcommittee. This meant that the draft policy staff had developed had to be reorganized and significantly rewritten.
Volume 1, Illinois Criminal Justice Information Authority (2007)