Crime fighting in the twenty‐first century?. A practitioner's assessment of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
| Date | 01 April 2006 |
| Pages | 129-140 |
| Published date | 01 April 2006 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/13685200610660952 |
| Author | David Fitzpatrick |
| Subject Matter | Accounting & finance |
Crime fighting in the
twenty-first century?
A practitioner’s assessment of the Serious
Organised Crime and Police Act 2005
David Fitzpatrick
Barrister-at-Law, Gilt Chambers, Hong Kong, People’s Republic of China
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to examine the Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (the Act),
in particular, the sections of the Act that establish the serious organised crime agency (SOCA) and to
anticipate the effectiveness of the Act against organised and serious crime in the UK.
Design/methodology/approach – The methodology employed is to examine Parts 1 and 2 of the
Act, in light of the response of concerned professionals to the Act’s passage through Parliament,
concerns expressed both in the press and in legal journals, and to critically examine the novel features
of the Act from the perspective of a professional who has worked in this same field (organised and
serious crime) in Hong Kong for more than 20 years.
Findings – The Act is to be welcomed, in particular, gathering the investigative and intelligence
functions of the police, customs and immigration service in one body SOCA, an elite limit to assist
other UK police forces and law enforcement agencies. The introduction of statutory mechanisms to
promote the co-operation of defendants as potential witnesses is also to be welcomed. However, it is
feared that the investigative powers created will be ineffective as the judiciary are not directly
involved and the powers that are given to SOCA will be easily evaded by ruthless or experienced
criminals.
Originality/value – It is hoped, the paper will promote interest in SOCA when it is “rolled out”
operationally in April 2006. It is also hoped that SOCA will be appreciated from the outset as only a
half-hearted adoption of the US organised crime “model”. The UK has decided not to use telephone
taps as a source of evidence, nor has it granted effective investigative powers to SOCA. Furthermore,
there has been no comprehensive clean-up of the present confusion of objectives that is so obvious in
the sentencing policy as it concerns offenders who commit serious crime or are involved in organised
criminal behaviour in the UK.
Keywords Criminals, Police,United Kingdom
Paper type Viewpoint
Introduction
On 7 April 2005, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (the Act) received royal
ascent. Parts 1 and 2 of the Act, respectively :
(1) establish the serious organised crime agency (SOCA), its constitution, function,
general powers and its relationship to the executive; and
(2) empower SOCA, under the supervision of the Director of Public Prosecutions
(the DPP), to compel people to cooperate in investigations, producing
documents and answering questions.
Additional to these powers of compulsion, Part 2 also provides a statutory mechanism
to facilitate the cooperation of suspects as prosecution witnesses and the protection of
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1368-5201.htm
Crime fighting
129
Journal of Money Laundering Control
Vol. 9 No. 2, 2006
pp. 129-140
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
1368-5201
DOI 10.1108/13685200610660952
To continue reading
Request your trial