The figures speak for themselves. Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) allows police to stop and search for stolen or prohibited items, such as knives or fireworks, where they have “reasonable grounds” for suspecting they’ll find them. But of the 1.1million section 1 stop and searches in 2011/12, just nine per cent resulted in arrests – meaning nine out of 10 people were stopped wholly unnecessarily. Of those arrested it is not known if there was sufficient evidence for prosecution and if so what they were prosecuted for.
Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, meanwhile, allows for stop and search without suspicion – to prevent serious violence or recover offensive weapons, for instance. But of nearly 47,000 section 60 stop and searches in 2011/12, fewer than three per cent resulted in arrest. And only 0.4 per cent were arrested for possessing an offensive weapon. That’s just 188 arrests – an alarmingly low number given section 60’s supposed aim of tackling violent crime and weapon possession. Section 60 is not only ineffective – Liberty believes it’s also unlawful and we will be seeking to establish this once and for all in a Court of Appeal case taking place next month.
Black and Asian people are significantly more likely to be stopped under these powers. Where suspicion isn’t required the statistics are even more extreme, with Asian or Asian British people accounting for nearly 17 per cent of section 60 stops and searches in 2011/12 and Black or Black British people nearly 36 per cent. It is a source of shame that these statistics have worsened since the MacPherson inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence; the latest figures show that black people are now 27 times more likely to be stopped and searched under s60 than white people.
Incredibly, despite such figures, the consultation tries to suggest that stop and search may be justified as a means of reassuring the public through increased police visibility. The idea that inappropriate, unlawful stop and search is justified because of the perceived feelings of those witnessing it is downright offensive. Imagine the same argument being made about an unlawful arrest. Police visibility requires nothing more than police presence. Stop and search is not a visibility tool but rather a coercive police power that must be exercised fairly and in accordance with the law. This smacks of institutional failure to understand the experience of those at the sharp end and the corrosive impact of routine humiliation and harassment.
Some progress may already have been made, with the Metropolitan Police recently introducing targets to reduce section 60 authorisations. There have since been reports of a 90 per cent fall in s.60 stop and search between 2011/12 and 2012/13, and an increased arrest rate of 21 per cent. If accurate, these figures are encouraging.
But more is required. Section 60 is unnecessary and unlawful, and should now be repealed. PACE’s section 1 already offers the necessary tools for police to act – short of arrest – where they have reasonable suspicion. Police training should also be urgently improved and measures brought forward to ensure the police properly record all the stops they make. As Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary has said - “For decades the inappropriate use of these powers, both real and perceived, has tarnished the relationship between constables and the communities they serve, and in doing so has brought into question the very legitimacy of the police service.” Overuse and misuse of stop and search is short-sighted and undermines police legitimacy. Rank-and-file officers must now be made to understand the effect on the people they serve.
Read our response to the Home Office consultation on police powers of stop and search here.
