Race Issues and Stop and Search: Looking behind the Statistics
| Author | Kiron Reid |
| DOI | 10.1350/jcla.2009.73.2.562 |
| Published date | 01 April 2009 |
| Date | 01 April 2009 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Looking behind the Statistics
Kiron Reid*
Abstract
This article considers the ongoing controversy over police
powers to stop and search. It particularly looks at the evidence of racial
disparity in use of these powers from the official statistics. The article
considers attempts to improve use of stop and search by the police,
including extra safeguards introduced after the Macpherson Report and
the reduction of recording requirements after the Flanagan Report. It
considers the argued fall in police use of stop and search after Macpherson
and increase in use of general and anti-terrorist stop and search powers
after 9/11 and 7/7. Police arguments to justify differential use between
ethnic groups are considered. While concentrating on the developments
since the late 1990s, the continuing nature of the debate about police use
of powers in the last few decades is highlighted. The article considers the
great concern about knife crime in recent years and government and
police policies to deal with this. The analysis focuses on the potential
impact on young people.
Keywords
Stop and search; Racial discrimination; Police; Young
people; Knife crime
In stop and search there are worrying general trends, which demon-
strate stops based on ethnicity or religion, that are well known and
continue a problem that in part predates 9/11 and 7/7. This relates to
how general powers are used and whether they are used in a way that
is more intrusive of liberty than justified by their effectiveness or as a
means to discriminate against particular groups. This article is about
England and Wales unless otherwise stated. The use of stop and search
powers have been just as controversial in the late 1990s and in this
decade as they were both before and after the introduction of safeguards
in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) in the 1980s. Stop
and search has been controversial in relation to race and effectiveness
for decades; however, it needs to be considered whether improvements
since PACE have been hindered by the way such powers are used.
Particular attention is given to the period post-2001, when controversy
has again intensified, to consider relevant trends. Some of these trends
are perhaps understandable or can be explained in a way which removes
the impression of discrimination. Lord Hope highlights this in Gillan and
Quinton:
Common sense tells us that the nature of the terrorist threat will play a
large part in the selection process. Typically terrorist acts are planned,
organised and perpetrated by people acting together to promote a common
cause rather than by individuals. They will have a common agenda. They
* Lecturer in Law, Liverpool Law School; e-mail: K.J.C.Reid@liverpool.ac.uk.
The Journal of Criminal Law (2009) 73 JCL 165–183
165
doi:1350/jcla.2009.73.2.562
The Journal of Criminal Law
are likely to be linked to sectors of the community that, because of their
racial, ethnic or geographical origins, are readily identifiable.1
Indiscriminate police action, on the other hand, damages community
relations and community confidence in the police. Baroness Hale, in a
case relating to immigration, makes the point that any official operation
whose subjects are one, comparatively easily identifiable, racial or
ethnic group requires enormous care if it is to be done without discrim-
ination.2 The same care is needed in police activity that inadvertently as
well as deliberately targets a particular ethnic or minority group. Meas-
ures implemented as improvements to stop and search and some relax-
ing of those restrictions have both been seen under the Blair and now
Brown government, and these require further examination.
These are not new general powers, but if they are used disproportion-
ately against particular groups, that discrimination could in addition be
used as a justification for more widespread interference in the liberty of
others. This article will concentrate on the general police stop and search
power under PACE, s. 1, as well as giving some attention to the specific
anti-terrorist stop and search power contained in s. 44 of the Terrorism
Act 2000. If use is authorised by a senior officer, the power under s. 44,
unlike the PACE power, does not require any reasonable suspicion by
the police officer. In that respect, this is similar to the stop and search in
anticipation of violence power introduced by s. 60 of the Criminal
Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJPOA) allowing searches in a
particular area for a specified time. Other important specific powers that
require reasonable suspicion are found in s. 23 of the Misuse of Drugs
Act 1971 and, for firearms, under s. 47 of the Firearms Act 1968.
Readers wanting a broad understanding of police powers that could be
used should also refer to Gillan and Quinton, the leading case on s. 44,
and to Laporte, the leading case on use of breach of the peace powers for
stop and search.3 Much of the information considered will be about
London where the issue has been particularly controversial. Finally, the
article will review Sir Ronnie Flanagan’s suggestions for making mon-
itoring of stop and search more effective and consider the implications
for civil liberties. It will be considered whether abolition of some of the
requirements around stop and search recording after the Flanagan
Report is a welcome reduction of unnecessary paperwork or the re-
moval of a significant safeguard at the behest of the police.4 This change
was trialled in 12 police forces from late October 2008.5 The great public,
1 R. (on the application of Gillan and Quinton) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis
[2006] UKHL 12 at [42].
2 R (on the application of European Roma Rights Centre) v Immigration Officer, Prague
Airport [2004] UKHL 55 at [97]. On the suspicion that can be generated by
apparent targeting of a group, see P. Hillyard, Suspect Community (Pluto Press:
London, 1993) considering the Irish community in Britain.
3 R v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire Constabulary, ex p. Laporte [2006] UKHL 55.
4 Independent Review of Policing by Sir Ronnie Flanagan: Final Report (Home Office:
London, 2008).
5 PACE Code of Practice A, which gives guidance to police officers on stop and
search, was amended with effect from 27 October 2008 (see SI 2008 No. 2638,
amending para. 4 of Code A) to provide for 12 force areas to record only ethnicity
when a person is subject to stop and account.
166
Race Issues and Stop and Search: Looking behind the Statistics
political and media concern about knife crime throughout 2008, which
included 20 teenagers killed in London up to 11 July 2008,6 must also be
noted as any government response may have implications for stop and
search. In the past concerns about particularly shocking incidents in-
volving knives have lead to legislation. That has not been the response of
the present government at the time of writing; however, legislation can
still be considered likely.7 A more likely result is that police use of
stop and search has increased in urban areas where there have been
publicised incidents. This similarly leads to issues about stereotyping
and effective use of intelligence as considered below. 2008 can be seen
as a year where concern about knife crime was the highest-profile
police story throughout the year.8 That the government did not respond
with ‘knee-jerk’ and ill-thought-out legislation can be seen as
commendable.
The problem
Lustgarten reported in 2002 that in every police force except Humber-
side there is a significant disparity in use of powers against ethnic
minority people as against white people.9 To take Merseyside as an
example, the figures for 1999–00 show that members of a racial minor-
ity were twice as likely to be stopped as a white person; for 2000–01, the
figures showed 17.5 stops per 1,000 white population; 57.2 per 1,000
racial minority population.10 This continued a problem that had been
highly controversial before the advent of PACE. Brogden and Brogden,
for example, had put the use of ‘sus’ laws and police stops in Liverpool
in their historical context after the riots there and in other minority
population inner-city areas in 1981.11 Lambert had earlier studied the
6 See, e.g., BBC News online, ‘Four stabbed to death on same day’, 11 July 2008, at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7501258.stm; BBC News online, ‘Jimmy
parents call for “respect”’, 15 June 2008, at http://news.bbc.co.uk /1/hi/england/london/
7455346.stm. See also Tom Warren, BBC News online, ‘Is knife crime really
increasing?’ 11 July 2008, available http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7502180.stm. All
accessed 10 February 2009.
7 Prime Minister Gordon Brown has stated: ‘Knife crime will be dealt with by a
combination of “enforcement, prevention and prosecution”’. See ‘PM outlines knife
crime action’, Press Release 14 July 2008, available at http://www.number10.gov.uk/
Page16317, accessed 9 February 2009.
8 Some random examples at the end of 2008: a front page story for the conservative
Daily Telegraph, “Knife crime reduced in areas targeted by police, new figures show’,
29 December 2008, by Lucy Cockcroft; a BBC online report, ‘Knife-carrying down
in “hotspots”’, 11 December 2008, available at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/
7776654.stm, accessed 11 February 2009; and coverage on the BBC Radio 4 Today
programme on the same day; each including critical commentary on Home Office
statistics released by the government. Detailed treatment is outside the scope of this
article, but more examples of concern and...
To continue reading
Request your trial