The Effects of Police and Criminal Evidence Act in English Policing - Literature review Example

The Effects of PACE in English Policing English and Wales established the police and criminal evidence act in1984 as a move to curb crime rates in the region. The act outlined a comprehensive legal framework that gave guidelines on how the police would use its powers. The act has changed the shape of English policing over the years. However, just like any other act, PACE has had its shortcomings. This paper will highlight the issues surrounding PACE. English Policing before PACE Before the enactment of the 1984 police and criminal evidence act, the famous stop and search operation by the police had given rise to multiple crises. There were public claims that the operation oppressed some races, by carrying out unwarranted searches. It became evident that the police were exercising abuse of the powers vested on them. The police search operations failed to meet their objectives. However, the police could only carry out stop and search mission in London and a few other towns only because the law did not support the practice in other cities and areas. For some people in London, the stop and search operations compromised the civil rights of the people (Malleson, 2007:121). The main objective of the stop and search operations was to identify individuals who could be in possession of stolen property. In cities lacking legislation for the stop and search operations, the police relied on the ‘ways and means act ‘that they translated in deceit allowing them to carry out searches. Legally, this act allowed them to search suspects only but the police tended to search people without valid justification. In addition, the police also misused the Vagrary act commonly called the ‘sus’ law that allowed them to search people loitering in public places as long as they exhibited intent of committing crime (Malleson, 2007:122). With increasing complains from the public, a resolution was critically essential. Majority of the laws favored people and discriminated others along racial lines, the blacks and Caribbean’s being mostly affected. Usually, most of those facing oppression lost cases because there were no records of police activities during that era. Neither the ministry nor the police commissioner made it mandatory for the officers to document searches. Consequently, even when the police had mishandled someone, substantial evidence lacked. In the 1970s, the public zealously demanded police accountability in the stop and search operations. The emergence of activist groups demanding a form of regulation in the way police used their power hastened the government to respond appropriately to rectify the situation. The initial solution involved abolition of the ‘sus’ law in 1981, because it served no identifiable purpose. The government also realized that the police were allowing the progression of minor cases to court (Malleson, 2007:121). In 1984, the emergence of the first section of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) that sought to clearly outline the boundaries of the police powers. In addition, the act gave guidelines on the application of the police powers. This served to set things straight between police powers and civil liberties of the people. After hearing the grievances of the people, the government of Wales and English made the act very comprehensive, reasserting the boundaries of the powers of the police. The PACE Act Key Features PACE outlines different codes of practice that defined the actions and operations of the police. The act provides guidelines concerning search, arrest, search, detention, interrogation, entry, and search of premises, and sample taking samples from the suspect. Code A highlighted the laws that governed any search by police. Code B outlined the guidelines and limits of searching of premises by police. On the other hand, code C highlighted the requirements that police had to observe in detention cases. This code also emphasized on the conditions that governed al the questioning that police officers carry out. Code D of the act outlined the criticality of the police in keeping all relevant records of their operations. Code E served to give police appropriate guidelines that would govern any tape recording and video recording that they would carry out. Code F augmented code E, making the guidelines of audio and video recording clear (Great Britain, 2005:47). The role of code G was to define how police offices used their powers in making arrests and outline the conditions under which arrests took place. The act also comprised of an additional code of practice that defined the circumstance s under which an individual would face detention. All these codes stated the conditions under which the police would take any action. The codes struck a balance between the powers designate to the police and the civil rights of the citizens. Although the police had the responsibility of taking relevant action as law enforcers, they had to protect the welfare of innocent citizens and human rights of those suspected of crime. For each of these codes, there are safeguard conditions that each individual can use to prevent any infringement of rights (Great Britain, 2005:27-60). PACE as a Watershed The institution of PACE was a defining moment in English policing. It gave English policing tremendous ways. The act gave the people a right to live without fear of police harassment. The fact that it presented the people with safeguards that they could apply each time the police tried to infringe into their privacy or enjoyment of their rights.teh police attitudes had to change with introduction of the new law. The act provided explicit guidelines that would govern the conduct of the officers in their daily struggle to combat crime. Before the introduction of the law, there were multiple cases of police harassment along tribal liners. Blacks were more susceptible to police stops and searches and were the initial suspects of any crime that occurred. The PACE act was a great relief to the blacks and other minority groups that had suffered unwarranted police searches and suspicion. The act set sorted out the confusion that existed among the people and the police. Advantages of PACE The act brought about multiple benefits to the front of English policing. The police understood their roles clearly. The multiple codes of practice served to clarify the responsibilities of the police in their line of duty. With such clarity, the police had an opportunity to serve the people confidently without the fear of breaching the boundaries of the law as seen in the preceding era. The police could operate on exhaustive guidelines that defined any course of action that their call for duty would require of them. Before the enactment of PACE, the police had multiple wrangles with civilians as they sought to enforce law. The act served as help at the right time because the police received reminders on all the conditions, and requirements that needed satisfaction ion before they meant any critical decisions. The police had served without any sensitivity to societal attributes. On the other hand, the act defined their entitlement to different rights whether as suspects or innocent civilians. The people could use the act in their defense if the police intimidated of harassed them in nay way. The act shaped a new perspective of search, arrest, detention, questioning, and search of premises. The act shed new light and created a vast awareness of clauses that sought to protect the welfare of the people. Minority groups had a form of defense against the unfairness that had afflicted them in the preceding decade. Disadvantages of PACE Similar to other laws, PACE posed its challenges as well. Breaking culture that had existed among the police for decades put some pressure on them. Every form of change must meet resistance and PACE was no different. Transforming the attitudes and inclinations of the police force was nota an easy venture. In addition, despite the act’s objectives to protect the right people, the efficiency depended on the enforcement and popularization of the act. The public was likely to turn rebellious to the police and use the law as an excuse. In addition, those who did not understand the law were still susceptible to high rates of police intimidation (Cape, & Young, 2008:200). Although the act outlined the roles of the police, the officers did not receive training that would enlighten them on the new approaches of English policing. Majority of the officers remained ignorant on culture sensitivity, an aspect that could foster rational interactions with members of the society. Amendments of PACE over the years The English government has made multiple amendments to the act over the years down to the current state. With the emergence of new concerns and understanding of human right and the role of the police, the cat undergoes amendment tom suit emerging needs. Amendments have served to augment and clarify the clauses in most of the codes of practice. A clear illustration involves changes that effected to codes C and H of the original document. The changes implemented define the new roles, requirements, and procedure that custody officers must adhere to in their practice. Additional clauses to code G outlines the circumstances under which an individual should give in to voluntary search and the boundaries that should limit police officers carrying out any voluntary search (Keogh, 2007:55). Other amendments to the act define guidelines of the events that the police should document in their daily ventures and the specific details that they should obtain for recording. New sections define the monitoring and supervision of the stop and search mission carried by police officers (Great Britain, 2005:15). The monitoring process is very crucial because it serves to ensure that none of the police officers breach the stringent regulations and infringe on the rights of the people. Amendments on the act have persisted and 2012 has seen the change of some of the changes. Other changes to the act have served to ensure juvenile justice in England and Wales. Future Prospects The act is subject to future changes as the English policing moves to new realms and employs 21st century strategies in addressing current crime challenges. The police department comprises of different independent units and the act needs to define responsibilities for each of these branches. In the 21st century, community policing is becoming one of the most preferred strategy that incorporates the society in combating crime. Amendments on the act have been trying to address this issue. Despite the challenges and shortcomings of the act, the future promises a better relationship between the Englih police and the citizens. The multi-racial recruitment of the police forces has served to minimize bias across ethnicity grounds. Increased awareness of civil rights by the people serve to reinforce the act because people raise concern when officers breach their right to enjoy civil rights and have legal representation and this trend is likely to continue in the future (Cape, & Young, 2008:200). The establishment of the police and criminal evidence act has changed the picture of English policing tremendously since its enactment in 1984. It served to do away with the preceding policing culture that proved highly wanting because it infringed the rights of the people. The old culture excised bias along racial lines and favored the whites. The minority groups did not have an easy time with the police and registered high frequencies of police stops and unwarranted searches. The minority groups were highly susceptible to suspicions for crimes by the police. Police searches failed to meet their objectives and only compromised the rights of the people. Activists demanded change in policing, an impetus that gave rise to the PACE act in 1984. PACE played a critical role in setting things apart in English policing by defining the responsibilities of police officers and defining safeguards for the people to prevent cases of intimidation. The act deserves credit for the inherent changes in policing. Over the years, several amendments have strengthened the act presenting it to outline 21st policing strategies. Bibliography Cape, E., & Young, R. 2008. Regulating policing: the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 past, present and future. Oxford, Hart. Great Britain. 2005. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (s.60(1)(a), s.60A(1) and s.66(1)): codes of practice A-G. London, TSO. Keogh, A. 2007. Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984: as amended : act as of 9 November 2007. S.l, CrimeLine Publishing. Malleson, K. 2007. The legal system. Oxford [u.a.], Oxford Univ. Press. Read More