Modern Development of the Law and Practice Concerning Stop and Search In Relation To Its Impact on Human Rights and Civil Liberties - Case Study Example

Explain and comment on the modern development of the law and practice concerning stop and search, particularly in relation to its impact on human rights and civil liberties. Stop and search powers have been a fundamental part of the English common law system and there have been various legislations that have tried to improve and make right these powers (About Human Rights, 2010). Allowing police some leeway in the execution of their duty as well as allowing the general public their rights allowed to them under the constitution and common law. Stop and search powers have been crucial when there does not seem to be enough ground for which a police officer can or should make an arrest and so allows the officer to stop and question a possible suspect while acting in the line of their duty (Codes of practice – Code A). Today, these rights are being questioned more and more often by the common man who find them to be going against the rights that they are to be allowed. However, rights to stop and search are also more and more crucial to the officers in the current global situation where terrorism is being chased in almost every corner of the globe. Allowing police the right to stop and question possible suspects who may be suspicious looking gives more of a sense of security to the public as seen by the police and law enforcing bodies. Though there have been uprisings against the power in the past as in 1981 (Jason-Lloyd, An introduction to policing and police powers, p. 27). Police and Criminal Practice Act of 1984 is the fundamental act of the legislation that allows and confers on the police officers under the common law to observe powers of stop and search (Malleson, The Legal System, p 122). The act lets officers to question individuals under the Terrorism Act 2000 and under specific sections of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. The basic idea of this power is to use it in a fair and just and responsible perspective to search people without any form of discrimination as is considered unlawful under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. If a person is being stopped by an officer then this encounter of questioning and detention should be as brief as possible and must take place in the nearby locality where the stopping of the individual took place. The law places a heavy burden and has set outlines for the police for the purpose of not stopping people randomly and often. If there is a show of a misuse of the powers of stop and search then there may be a question as to the legality of it and the officer may be held accountable of his actions (Cavendish, English Legal System Lawcard, p.43). Currently due to the nature of the world order and heightened security and threats in the countries there have been cases where misuse of powers of stop and search have shown to be present. Such instances put the police body and the legislators to task to either minimize such instances or to do away with the powers of the police to be able to stop anyone and question them at will. The Terrorism Act 2000 contained within it a section that allowed for police to stop suspicious individuals under that section but could do so only in a geographically defined area that was put on alert for terrorism or potential terrorist activities (Civil Rights Movement, 2010). Such provisions make things a lot easier for the police and public. PACE provisions however, have not settled well with the courts elsewhere and there have been attacks on it from various public and legal bodies. More importantly, as members of the European Union there have been difference in the manner in which the United Kingdom and the European countries see the issue. A matter that can be highlighted to show the different banks that the two sides stand on is the fact that the provisions and the powers conferred and propelled by PACE are quite contrary and in stark contrast with the right that individuals have been given to a private life under the European Convention on Human Rights as stated in Article 8. What’s more is that this particular article was brought into effect in the United Kingdom in 2000 when the Human Rights Act 1998 was implemented. Section 44 of the Terrorism Act went to say that people could be stopped and searched without there being any reasonable suspicion which clearly seems to violate the fundamental rights that humans are said to enjoy under most developed countries (Liberty, 2010). Under such a rigid and unfiltered sort of the legislation there can be times when completely innocent individuals who seem to catch the eye of officers can be stopped and their property confiscated due to the rights allowed to the law enforcing agencies. There have been situations arising when journalists and even protestors who gather in areas have been stopped and questioned by police officers in an unwarranted manner even though their presence at a place was warranted and proved to be unsuspicious (Watson, 2010). A situation such as this arose in 2003 when there was a an exhibition being held at the Excel Centre in London where two individuals, Mr Gillan and Ms Quinton were both detained by the police under PACE. There were demonstrators already outside the Defense Systems and Equipment International where the two were arrested. Mr Gillan was heading towards the demonstration to join it when according to him he was stopped and detained by the police present there under PACE for twenty minutes. Ms Quinton was detained for what she claims to be thirty minutes while she was filming the protestors, being a journalist (BBC News, 12 January 2010). The case that was brought forward by these two against their detention by the police, which they hold to have been unlawful and unwarranted, has been ground breaking in the fight that bodies have been having against the United Kingdom police and legislators. The European Court of Human Rights in its judgment on the matter and held that the detention was a violation of the human rights of the two and that it interfered with their right to a private life. This judgment has been quite astounding and will eventually lead the legislators to make some serious amends to the act itself. An appeal has been filed against the decision of their court but there does not seem to be any chance that the judgment will be reversed as the courts in the European community did not seem to be happy with PACE to start with. The English government however does not seem to be concerned at the moment about the violations that the act is causing and hold that the powers will continue to be used by the police until the appeal is heard and a ruling has been passed out on it. Though as flawed as PACE and the powers to stop and search anyone at anytime without suspicions seem to be there is certainly a need for such legislation and acts in Europe. Terrorism has been running around rampant and the manner in which unsuspecting people have been the reason behind a few terrorist acts and plots certainly does put the police and government on edge. If there are no laws allowing for the searching of the individuals in a legal manner then the government and the police are helpless. A balancing of the rights of the public and citizens and the protection and security of them is in need and the government is hard pressed on which to sacrifice for a beneficial result. A government reviewer of the anti-terror policies, Lord Carlile, has stated that the decision of the court will certainly have a lot of effect on the policies of the United Kingdom government. He believes that the court is looking out for the public and protecting the human rights of all as seen to be important to them. At the same time he has maintained that there needs to a protection of the country and its entire citizen and for that purpose PACE exists. Radial changes have been made in the United Kingdom in recent years as it has a lot to fear from the Islamic radicals that it is trying so hard to detect and detain before they do any harm to the people and property. There is a trade-off as the public of the country is getting tired of the overwhelming and sweeping powers being given to police personnel that in turn invade their rights as citizens. There have been concerns by the European Courts of Human Rights over the process and practice of the English government of even registering and compiling the DNA data of innocents in its database (The Economist, 14 January 2010). Cases and issues such as the legal detention of an individual’s being increased to the time of forty two days for those who were held under suspicion of terrorism have been brought to the highest court in the country, the House of Lords in 2008. This is certainly a fearful idea and promulgation of it would have detrimental effect on the civil and human rights of the public. Many have pointed out that the powers have caused an ethical bias towards those who are from an Asian and African background raising the resentment among such ethnicities and this may lead to a backlash from such communities (MPA, 2010). Not only this but many times even tourists have been stopped under PACE from taking pictures of structures that are seen to be famous by them but sensitive in nature. The legality of the powers have raised the numbers of those stopped and questioned from 33000 in 2004 to an astounding figure of 117000 by 2008. In 2010 the Home Office published figures showing the number of searches that were made under PACE and the figure stood at 101248. The surprising this however was the fact that only 504 people out of this tremendous figure were later arrested and charged with any offence (Travis, Guardian, 28 October 2010). Not only this but another blow to the idea of PACE was that no individual who was searched was arrested and charged under the suspicion of terrorism. PACE may seem to be a safeguard against terrorism and other offences to the government and the Home Office but it is bringing in more fire than solving any issues. In a number of cases the right to use stop and search were shown to be illegal and a complaint had the police officers chasing around the people whom they had illegally detained so that they could apologize (Travis, Guardian, 10 June 2010). Heavy criticism from their fellow European countries and courts is also a cause of concern for the government as they may not be able to hold off the complains longer as many tourists from other parts of Europe are being caught up in the mix and this brings in negative points from their fellow nations. The statistics of searches and then in tune with these the arrest ratio is also not favoring the Home Office or the police departments and there certainly needs to be a reviewing of the system. PACE is a clearly not enjoying any good pointers and is becoming a bothersome legislative burden on the public in England. There has even been a rise in the complaints filed against the stop and search being conducted (JCHR, 2010, p.47). It is doing more harm than good to the citizens and clearly is a violation of the human rights of the people. Right to privacy is continuously being deprived on a number of occasions due to the intrusive nature of PACE and at times there is a clear violation of a person’s right to movement when they are detained for long periods of time for no cause. The act may have been made in good faith by the government but there are clearly gaping holes in it and these need to be filled in before the act can be said to be fair and impartial to the citizens. Otherwise there will be more actions and judgments against the act as in the case of the decision handed down by the European Court of Human Rights. References 2010, ‘Stop-and-search powers ruled illegal by European court’, BBC News, 12 January Alan, T 2010, ‘Stop and search used illegally against thousands’, Guardian, 10 June Alan, T 2010, ‘No terror arrests in 100,000 police counter-terror searches, figures show’, Guardian, 28 October Cavendish, 2004, English Legal System Lawcard, Cavendish Publishing, London. Codes of practice – Code A Exercise by police officers of statutory powers of stop and search, Home Office, London, viewed on 13 November, 2010 < http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/publications/police/operational-policing/pace-codes/pace-code-a?view=Binary>. Editor, 2010, ‘Stop stop and search’, The Economist, 14 January Great Britain: Parliament: Joint Committee on Human Rights 2010, Crime and Security Bill 2009-2010, Parliament of Great Britain, London. Human Rights and Powers of Stop and Search 2010, About Human Rights, viewed 13 November, 2010 < http://www.abouthumanrights.co.uk/human-rights-powers-stop-search.html>. Kate, Malleson 2007, The legal system, Oxford University Press, London. Leonard, Jason-Lloyd 2005, An introduction to policing and police powers, Cavendish Publishing, London. Liberty Wins Landmark Stop and Search Case in Courts of Human Rights 2010, Liberty, viewed 13 November, 2010 < http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/media/press/2010/liberty-wins-landmark-stop-and-search-case-in-court-of-human-rights.php>. Steve, Watson 2010, ‘Human Rights Court Savages UK Stop & Search Terror Powers’, Prison Planet, 13 November, 2010 . Stop and Search 2010, Home Office, London, viewed 13 November, 2010, < http://www.mpa.gov.uk/scrutinies/stop-search/>. Stop and Search 2010, Liberty, viewed 13 November, 2010 < http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/human-rights/justice/stop-and-search/index.php>. Stop, Search and Arrest Rights 2010, Civil Rights Movement, viewed 13 November, 2010 < http://www.civilrightsmovement.co.uk/stop-search-arrest-rights.html>. Read More