Is police use of stop and search ethical?

Authors Avatar

                 

Is Police use of Stop and Search Ethical?

 “The powers of the police under current legislation are required for the prevention and detection of crime and should remain unchanged”. (Mcpherson, 1998)

INTRODUCTION

This report looks at how the Police have used stop and search powers over history and how contributing factors such racism and crime have caused policies and practices to evolve into the laws as we know them today.

HISTORY

The statutory authority for stop and search began with the vagrancy Act of 1824, which was passed to stop destitute soldiers coming back from the Napoleonic wars begging on the streets (socialistworker.co.uk). This controversially became known as The ‘sus’ law giving police the authority to arrest and prosecute anybody who was ‘loitering with intent’. This led to ethnic communties being targeted by the police in a blatient act of discrimination. (Maguire et al 2007). The Act was amended several times, most notably by the Vagrancy Act 1839 which introduced a number of new public order offences that were deemed at the time to be likely to cause moral outrage.

Legistlation continued to be amended throughout history, although ethnic minorities continued to be discriminated agaisnt, partly because the police service was still almost exclusively white.  A lack of understanding alienated ethnic minority communties and led to mutual mistrust and resentment. The Police were seen as operationally depandant, inward looking and at times oppresive and therefore not an agency that is seen to work well with others.

                                                                   1

The Phillips commission of 1978, suggested that the police were allowing too many weak cases to go to court. Pоlісy mаkіng started to change radically and The Cival Disorders of 1981 were seen as a catalyst. It involved hundreds of young people attacking property and Police causing thousands of pounds of damage to there own town. This primal act, was retribution for particulary young black people in Brixton  who had voiced a lack of trust in the law after police had carried out Operation Swamp. Operation Swamp 81, resulted in a significant number of black youths being stopped and searched in connection with street robberies in the area. ()

 The government responded by ordering an urgent inquiry called The Scarman Report which included recommendations about reforming ther law, community relations and policing practices to help tackle the central problems which caused the disorders (www.icva.org.uk).  The sus laws were subsiquently abloished and were replaced with Section 1 of the Police And Criminal Evidence Act (PACE). This standardised the power for police to stop and search people, although PACE determined that there must be an objective basis for police suspicion to stop and search. More importantly personal factors such as skin colour or dress code were not sufficient grounds to stop and search.( and policy.org). It was regarded as a time in which the rights of

Join now!

suspects would be equally balanced with the need to tackle crime (Young, 1994).

Since the inception of PACE, legislative changes have introduced more powers to stop and search, and today, police officers have at their disposal a variety of powers which are drawn from a range of statutory instruments such as the Terrorism Act (2000) and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act (1994), Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc) Act (1985) and the Drugs Act (1971)  in addition to those provided under PACE (Bland et al 2000)

While the earlier Scarman Inquiry had rejected claims of ...

This is a preview of the whole essay