header-logo header-logo

Plans to extend police powers are panned

23 March 2007
Issue: 7265 / Categories: Legal News , Local government , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Proposals to relax fingerprinting restrictions and allow police to question suspects until the time of their trial—even after charges have been made—have been attacked by lawyers and civil rights campaigners.

The Home Office plans, laid out in a consultation paper reviewing the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 last week, also float the idea of allowing police to site short-term detention centres in shopping malls.

The government says existing rules, which require suspects to be taken to police stations, take too long and clog up space in police custody. The cells could hold suspects for up to four hours to enable fingerprinting, photographing and DNA sampling.

DNA samples and fingerprints could be taken from those suspected of petty crimes. Liberty policy director Gareth Crossman says: “Six years ago, DNA sampling was about combating serious crime. Today dropping litter is proposed as a lame excuse for an ever-growing national DNA database.”
The consultation looks at areas of police work ranging from how suspects are bailed to how stop-and-search operations are conducted.

Criminal

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll