header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
13 April 2007 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7268 / Categories: Features , Local government , Public , Community care
printer mail-detail

Change of PACE

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Michael Zander QC considers whether the new Home Office review of PACE is good news

The Home Office has established a fresh and fundamental review of PACE, Modernising Police Powers: Review of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The consultation paper (CP), issued on 14 March 2007, calls for suggestions on a great variety of topics. It is difficult to know whether the prospect should be viewed with optimism or pessimism. What is the agenda driving the review? Does it portend dismantling or weakening of basic PACE structures and systems or will it lead to useful improvements? Is the consultation exercise genuine or merely a cover for changes the Home Office has already decided on?

In his foreword, the Minister for Police and Security, Tony McNulty, having lauded the safeguards in the system, writes of “bureaucratic processes and over-complicated procedures in the application of these safeguards which do not serve the best interests of the police, or the criminal justice system or, importantly, those of the victim”. This sounds like mood

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Appeal court reins in ‘wrong defendant’ switcheroo

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

NLJ this week: Driving test fraudsters steer towards jail
Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
NLJ this week: Deepfakes demand data law muscle
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
NLJ this week: 40% penalty for coercive control
In a striking financial remedies ruling, the High Court cut a wife’s award by 40% for coercive and controlling behaviour. Writing in NLJ this week, Chris Bryden and Nicole Wallace of 4 King’s Bench Walk analyse LP v MP [2025] EWFC 473
NLJ this week: Mbappé row spotlights ‘ethics bonuses’
A €60.9m award to Kylian Mbappé has refocused attention on football’s controversial ‘ethics bonus’ clauses. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Estelle Ivanova of Valloni Attorneys at Law examines how such provisions sit within French labour law
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll