header-logo header-logo

01 March 2024 / Neil Parpworth
Issue: 8061 / Categories: Features , Criminal , Human rights
printer mail-detail

Search & seizure: what’s reasonable?

161579
Neil Parpworth assesses some key & worrying provisions in the Criminal Justice Bill
  • The Criminal Justice Bill expands police powers against citizens.
  • Covers clause 22 on the seizing of bladed articles and suspected stolen goods.
  • Covers clause 24 on warrantless entry and search.

At the time of writing, the latest Criminal Justice Bill is at the Report stage in the House of Commons. It contains a raft of provisions which range from addressing nuisance begging and rough sleeping to introducing a duty of candour in policing. For present purposes, however, the two clauses of particular interest seek to confer additional powers on the police to seize bladed articles and to enter premises to search for and seize stolen goods. Should they become law, such powers will inevitably impact upon the rights and freedoms of citizens. Accordingly, it is important to assess their scope and extent and determine whether they are subject to appropriate safeguards which are likely to prevent their misuse.

Clause 22

This provision seeks to confer

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

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Thackray Williams—Lucy Zhu

Dual-qualified partner joins as head of commercial property department

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Morgan Lewis—David A. McManus

Firm announces appointment of next chair

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Burges Salmon—Rebecca Wilsker

Director joins corporate team from the US

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll