Disproportionate and Discriminatory: Reviewing the Evidence on Police Stop and Search
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.2007.00671.x |
| Author | Coretta Phillips,Ben Bowling |
| Published date | 01 November 2007 |
| Date | 01 November 2007 |
Disproportionate and Discriminatory: Reviewing the
Evidence on Police Stop and Search
Ben Bowling
n
and Coretta Phillips
nn
Eight years after the LawrenceInquiry, the question of police powersto stop and se archpeople i n
public places remains at the forefront of debate about police community relations. Police are
empowered to stop and search citizens under a wide range of legislative acts and the power is
employeddaily across Britain. Far from layingthe debate to rest, the LawrenceInquiry prompted
new research studies and fresh theories to explain the o⁄cial statistics.We argue that the statistics
show thatthe us eof the powersagainst black people is disproportionate and that this is an indica-
tion of unlawful racial discrimination. If stop and search powers cannot be e¡ectively regulated^
and it seems that they cannot ^ then their continued use is unjusti¢ed and should be curtailed.
Nothing has been more damaging to the relationship between the police and the
black community than the ill-judged us e of stop and search powers. For young
black men in particular, the humiliating experience of being repeatedly stopped
and searched is a sad fact of life, in some parts of London at least. It is hardlysurpri s-
ing that those on the receivingend of this treatment should develop hostile attitudes
towardsthe police.The right to walk the streets is a fundamental one, and one thatis
quite rightly jealously guarded.
1
INTRODUCTION
Police powers to stop and search individuals in public remain amongst the most
contentious aspects of British policing. The issue was highlighted by both the
Scarman
2
and Stephen Lawrence
3
inquiries into particular policing incidents. It
became particularly controversial at the turn of the millenniumwhen prominent
people of African Caribbean origin ^ including the late Bernie Grant MP, Lord
Taylor of Warwick, Lord Herman Ouseley and the Most Revd and Rt Hon
Dr John Sentamu Archbishop of York ^ disclosed their personal experiences of
being unjusti¢ably stopped and searched. Following the Home O⁄ce Action
Plan,
4
published in response to the Lawrence Inquiry report, a number of new
studies have been conducted to examine police use of the power. Far from laying
the argument to rest, each successive report has fuelled further argument, with
n
King’s College London, School of Law.
nn
London School of Economics, Departmentof Social Policy.We wouldli keto thank Jocelyn Cock-
burn, Amber Marks, Cian Murphy, James Ross and the anonymous reviewers of the MLR for con-
structive comments on earlier drafts. Adraft of this paper was submitted to the 2007 Home O⁄ce
Reviewof the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984).
1 The late Bernie Grant MP,quoted in NACRO,PolicingLocal Communities:TheTottenhamExperiment
(London: NACRO, 2002) 3.
2 Lord Scarman,The BrixtonDisordersApril10^121981:Report ofan Enquiry (London: HMSO,1981).
3 W. Macpherson,TheStephen LawrenceInquiry,Report of an Inquiryby SirWilliam Macphersonof Cluny
(London: Home O⁄ce,1999).
4HomeO⁄ce,HomeSecretary’s Action Plan (London: HomeO⁄ce, 1999).
r2007 The Authors.Journal Compilation r2007 The Modern Law Review Limited.
Published by BlackwellPublishing, 9600 Garsington Road,Oxford OX4 2DQ,UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
(2007) 70(6) 936^961
the debate sharply divided between apologists and abolitionists. After a brief
consideration of the legal basis for stop and search powers, this paper re-analyses
the perenni al question of whether the practice can be descr ibed as disproportion-
ate and discriminatory in relation to ethnic minority communities. A thorough
analysis of the research shows that despite some innovative arguments from
the apologists, the disproportionate use of police powers cannot easily be
explained away.
THE POWER TO STOPAND SEARCH
According to the Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) Code of Practice for the
exercise of statutory powers of stop/search, the primary purpose of the power is
‘to enable o⁄cers to allay or con¢rm suspicions about individuals without exer-
cising their power of arrest’.
5
The police are empowered to stop and search by
many legislative instruments too numerous to detail in full here.
6
The most fre-
quently used powers are those under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evi-
dence Act 1984, section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, section 60 of the
Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, section 47 of the Firearms Act 1968
and sections 44(1) and (2) ofthe Terrorism Act 2000. Additionally, vehicles maybe
stoppedu nder section163 of the Road Tra⁄c Act1988 andsearched under section
4 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.
In relation to section1 of thePolice and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 23
Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 and section 47 Firearms Act1968, police o⁄cers must
have ‘reasonable grounds to suspect’that a person is in possession of stolenor pro-
hibited articles. Under section 43 of theTerrorism Act 2000, the requirement is a
reasonable suspicion that the person is a terrorist. The PACE codes of practice
states that while ‘reasonable grounds for suspicion depend on the circumstances
of each case’,
[t]here must be an objective basis for that suspicion based on facts,information, and/
or intelligence which are relevant to the likelihood of ¢nding an article of a certain
kind, or in the case of searches under section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000, to the
likelihood that the person is a terrorist. Reasonable suspicion can never be sup-
ported on the basis of personal factors alone without reliable or supporting intelli-
gence or information or some speci¢c behaviour by the person concerned. For
example, a person’s race, age, appearance, or the fact that the person is known to
have a previousconviction, cannot be used alone or in combination with each other
as the reason for searching that person. Reasonable suspicion cannot be based on
generalisations or stereotypical images of certain groups or categories of people as
more likely to be involvedi n criminal activity.
7
. .. reaso nable suspicion should normally be linked to accurate or current intelli-
gence or information, such as information describing an article be ing carried, a
5HomeO⁄ce,Code ofPractice forthe Exerciseby PoliceO⁄cersofStatutory Powersof Stop and Search,Code
A(London: Home O⁄ce,2005). (Hereafter,‘Pace Code A’) at [1.4].
6 PACE Code A, AnnexA.
7 PACE Code A at [2.2].
Ben Bowling and Coretta Phill ips
937
r2007 The Authors.Journal Compilation r2007 The Modern Law Review Limited.
(2007) 70(6) 936^961
To continue reading
Request your trial