Policing the Railways and Related Legal Issues
| Published date | 01 December 2003 |
| Date | 01 December 2003 |
| Author | Kiron Reid |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.67.6.495.19438 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Related Legal Issues
Kiron Reid*
Abstract
This article takes the form of a critique of the government
implementation of the new statutory accountability of British Transport
Police (BTP). It starts with a brief review of why the role of BTP is
important to the public and how the force interacts with other forces
(including wider concerns about rail safety and responsibility of rail
companies to the law through development of the law of corporate
manslaughter). The article also considers whether current developments
over policing the railways are influenced by the increasing national coor-
dination of policing and whether national or local coordination or control
of police should be increased and what legal issues arise. This is partic-
ularly debated with regard to controversy over police numbers, and
touching on other non-Home Office forces such as Ports Police, as well as
the role of Special Branch. An evaluation of the changes on powers and
jurisdiction for the BTP in the recent anti-terrorist legislation is also
included, in comparison with the extended powers and jurisdiction for UK
Atomic Energy Authority and Ministry of Defence police. As with the
author’s previous work many localised examples are given to give a real
picture to the legal issues raised.
Introduction
The main sources used to research this article, apart from the Railways
and Transport Safety Act 2003, are the original Bill, Hansard debates,
and the Department of Transport paper, Summary of Replies to Consultation
Paper on ‘Modernising the British Transport Police’ and Government Response.1
An outline of the background to the legislative changes can be found
elsewhere.2 A familiarity with the British system of accountability of the
police is assumed, though recent changes and developments are
touched on below.3
* Lecturer in Law, University of Liverpool.
Thank you to Andrea Houghton for research assistance on anti-terrorism law.
Thanks also to Phil Gray for administrative assistance.
1 Department for Transport: London, 2002 (hereafter DfT 2002). For the
organisation of British railways, see L. Whitehouse, ‘Railtrack is Dead—Long Live
Network Rail?’ (2003) 30 Journal of Law and Society 217.
2 K. Reid ‘Current Developments in Police Accountability’ (2002) 66 JCL 172 at
180–3. Other sources on the BTP: J. Whitbread, The Railway Policeman (Harrap:
London, 1961); P. Appleby, A Force on the Move: The Story of the British Transport
Police 1825–1995 (Images: Malvern, 1995). The BTP website is helpful:
www.btp.police.uk (viewed at 21 August 2003).
3 For an introduction to general legal issues of policing and police accountability, see
S. H. Bailey, D. J. Harris and B. L. Jones, Cases and Materials on Civil Liberties, 5th
edn (Butterworths: London, 2001) ch. 2; L. Jason-Lloyd, An Introduction to Policing
and Police Powers (Cavendish: London, 2000); D. Wilson and J. Ashton, What
Everyone in Britain Should Know About the Police (Blackstone: London, 2001); S.
Uglow, Criminal Justice, 2nd edn (Sweet & Maxwell: London, 2002) ch. 2; M.
McBride and G. Collins, The UK Police: A Pocket Guide 2002–2003 (Pen and Sword
Books: Barnsley, 2002). It should be borne in mind that many of the sources of
analysis on the exercise of police powers are in sociology, criminology and politics,
as well as professional publications. A start can be made with B. Bowling and J.
495
The Journal of Criminal Law
The Railways and Transport Safety Bill was introduced in the House
of Commons on 14 January 2003 (Bill 40). Its Second Reading in the
House of Commons was on 28 January 2003, in the House of Lords on
1 May 2003, and it received the Royal Assent on 10 July 2003. Part 1 is
about the investigation of railway accidents establishing a Rail Accident
Investigation Branch. This follows part 2 of Lord Cullen’s report into the
Ladbroke Grove rail crash. Lord McIntosh of Haringey explained ‘the
branch’s aims will be, first, to improve the safety of the railways; and,
secondly, to prevent railway accidents and railway incidents’.4 Part 3 of
the Act puts the governance and organisation of British Transport Police
on a clear statutory footing and establishes a statutory police
authority.
Debate about the rail industry, safety, policing and criminal law is
recurrent throughout different periods of time. This is summarised, for
example, in the call for papers of a conference of the ‘SOLON’ academic
network in 2002, highlighting Victorian and modern perspectives on the
railways. This emphasised that the development of the rail network in
Victorian times had:
both desirable and undesirable effects on aspects of daily life. It was
consciousness of this which led to the heightened interest in the cultural
workings of the railway system and the legal ramifications thereof. But
experience and reportage soon showed the extent to which the railways
were also a focus for crime and bad behaviour, both in reality and in the
public imagination. Nor has either the fascination with railways, or the
opportunities for ‘crime’ disappeared in the modern age, as recent train
crashes and the debates over responsibility emphasise.5
In recent years the major rail crashes at Southall (1997), Ladbroke
Grove (1999), Hatfield (2000), Selby (2001), Potters Bar (2002) have
been investigated by the BTP. These have led to the railways also being
centre stage of political and public debate.6 On the other hand criminal
law and policing issues regarding railways have not necessarily been the
concern of law scholars. For example, in Alan Leslie’s 1928 text only two
of 18 sections appear to be concerned with criminal law.7 This may be
because there is very little criminal law that is actually specific to the
railways. There is an apparent dearth of legal analysis of the BTP.
Foster, ‘Policing and the Police’ in R. Maguire, R. Morgan and R. Reiner (eds). The
Oxford Handbook of Criminology, 3rd edn (Oxford University Press: Oxford, 2002) ch.
27.
4 For a summary of the reasoning, see Lord McIntosh of Haringey, HL Deb, vol. 647,
col. 799, 1 May 2003. See further Explanatory Notes Railways and Transport Safety Act
2003 Chapter 20 (TSO: London, 2003) paras 13–42.
5 ‘Off the Rails: Behaving Badly on the Railways’ conference, York, 20 April 2002
(Nottingham Trent University) www.solon.ntu.ac.uk/home.htm. See particularly,
J. Rowbotham ‘Behaving Badly on the Railways—Whose Anti-Social Tradition?’.
Thank you to Paul Baker for abstracts and to John Locker.
6 For example, see the Independent front page, 17 June 2003; Don Foster MP (Liberal
Democrat Shadow Transport Secretary) Press Release, 27 January 2003 ‘33 key
railway safety measures still not implemented’.
7 The Law of Transport by Railways, 2nd edn (Sweet & Maxwell: London, 1928).
These are s. 18 offences by passengers, parts of s. 10 explosives; but see also ibid.
at 235, 244.
496
Policing the Railways and Related Legal Issues
Recent change to the jurisdiction of BTP is welcome. This is examined
below. In reports from 1995 onwards Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of
Constabulary (HMIC) argued strongly in favour of increased jurisdic-
tion, noting that the
limited nature of the jurisdiction powers available to British Transport
Police officers ‘. . . was seen as the single most important issue raised by
officers of all ranks’.8
Given that the role of HMIC is to examine and improve the efficiency of
the Police Service in England and Wales, it shows an appreciation of
governance issues and the importance of democratic control that HMIC
also emphasised the importance of reform of legal accountability
arrangements.
2.9 In 1995, Her Majesty’s Inspector endorsed the then proposal that the
employment and governance responsibilities currently exercised in respect
of British Transport Police by the Police Committee on behalf of the British
Railways Board (BRB) should be transferred to a free-standing Railways
Police Authority (RPA). At that time, he felt that the Force served three
distinct communities—the railway industry, the travelling public and the
wider population living in the environs of the railways. This led to his
conclusion that ‘. . . . The Force must be seen to consult with and to serve
each of those communities’ and that the body governing the Force should
reflect those communities in the spirit of recent legislation that restruc-
tured Home Office police authorities.
The question as to how far the government has done this is addressed in
detail below.
The funding structure of BTP also has an impact on the appearance of
accountability and control. At present funding is largely by the private
railway companies.9 The legal structure of an independent body is
undermined by the actual funding system which does not give an
appearance of independence.
A final issue that is important is railways and fear of crime. The
concerns of passengers or potential passengers can have an impact on
government policies such as encouraging public transport use. The
wider deployment of BTP officers, on the other hand, may help reduce
fear of crime in surrounding areas. Fear of terrorism is probably not at
the top of the public’s concerns. The terrorist threat is, however, an
important challenge for modern railway police.10 The BTP’s role in
tackling terrorist offences is analysed below.
8 HMIC, 2001/2002 Inspection British Transport Police (Home Office: London, 2001)
para. 2.11 (hereafter HMIC).
9 HMIC para. 5; DfT 2002 para. 10.
10 Terrorist attacks on railways are not of course a new phenomena. In his
autobiographical Borstal Boy Brendan Behan recounts how as a...
To continue reading
Request your trial