The standard comes before the service.

Verification is proportionate to the role and lawful in the jurisdiction concerned. It typically includes confirming identity and the right to work, reviewing professional history and references, and — where the law permits and the role justifies it — appropriate background and record checks.

For former military, law-enforcement or government personnel, it also means confirming that any post-service restrictions, required permissions and continuing obligations have been satisfied before an engagement is even considered. Verification is not a single event: where roles change, responsibility increases or relevant information comes to light, suitability is reviewed again.

Relevant qualifications may include professional security or protection training, first-aid and medical certificates, driving qualifications, training required for licensing in a particular jurisdiction, and competencies specific to the task. Experience is assessed for relevance rather than prestige: a distinguished background in one field does not automatically suit an assignment in another.

Where qualifications expire or require periodic renewal, their currency is checked rather than assumed. Where a requirement calls for a competence that is not available among suitably verified specialists, that is said plainly instead of an arrangement being stretched to fit.

Private security is regulated differently from one country — and sometimes one region — to the next. Some jurisdictions license the organisation, some license individuals, some regulate particular activities, and some restrict the involvement of foreign personnel altogether. Before an engagement is accepted, the requirements that apply to the proposed work, the place and the people are identified.

Where lawful delivery requires a locally licensed partner, the work is structured that way, and partners are expected to hold and maintain their own licences. Where a licence cannot be obtained, or the activity is not permitted, the work is not undertaken in that form.

The insurance an engagement needs depends on the activity, the location and the contractual arrangements involved. Depending on circumstances, relevant forms of cover can include professional indemnity, public or general liability, employer’s liability and travel-related cover. Requirements are identified during scoping, and any conditions or exclusions that affect how the work can be carried out are reflected in planning.

Where a partner organisation delivers part of an engagement, its insurance position is examined as part of the arrangement rather than taken for granted. Cover is never described to a client as broader than it is.

Security work touches many areas of law: private security regulation, employment and immigration rules, data protection, the law on self-defence and the use of force, restrictions on equipment, and transport and customs rules, among others. The requirements that apply are considered during scoping and kept under review as circumstances change.

Specialists act as private individuals within the law of the place in which they are working. They do not exercise police, military or governmental powers, and they do not undertake activities reserved to public authorities. Where there is genuine legal uncertainty, appropriate advice is sought before anything proceeds.

Itineraries, residences, routines, business plans and family details are sensitive by nature. Access is limited on a need-to-know basis, specialists and partners are bound by confidentiality obligations, and information is handled through appropriate channels and kept only for as long as it is needed. Client relationships themselves are treated as confidential.

Confidentiality protects legitimate interests. It is not a means of concealing unlawful conduct, and it operates within the limits of the law — including where disclosure is legally required, as the declaration below explains.

Only information genuinely needed for a defined purpose is collected. It is stored with appropriate safeguards, shared only where necessary and lawful, and deleted or returned when it is no longer required. Applicable data-protection laws, which vary considerably between jurisdictions, are respected — including the rights they give to individuals.

Privacy extends beyond the client. Security work can involve information about employees, visitors, neighbours and members of the public. Assessments and protective arrangements are designed so that they do not intrude on other people’s privacy further than is lawful and justified.

Protective work is conducted courteously and proportionately, with a strong preference for avoidance and de-escalation. Specialists do not discriminate, intimidate or harass, and they respect the rights of the people they encounter — members of the public, staff, journalists and bystanders included. Any use of force must be strictly lawful, necessary and proportionate, as the law of the relevant place defines those terms.

Before an engagement is accepted, consideration is given to whether it could contribute to harm to others. Work that would involve, facilitate or benefit from abuses of human rights is declined.

Expectations of conduct cover honesty, sobriety while working, respect for clients and the public, and the avoidance of conflicts of interest. Specialists do not misrepresent their background, status or powers, and they do not wear or imply insignia, ranks or uniforms that suggest official authority.

Concerns about conduct — whether raised by clients, partners, specialists or members of the public — are taken seriously, reviewed fairly and acted upon. Conduct that falls below the standard has consequences, up to and including the end of an engagement.

No one acting for the organisation may offer, promise, give, request or accept anything of value to influence a decision improperly — whether the other party is a public official or a private individual. That includes payments to accelerate permits, access or border formalities. Gifts and hospitality must be modest, transparent and never intended to influence.

Partners and intermediaries are expected to meet the same standard. Where an arrangement could only proceed through an improper payment, it does not proceed.