header-logo header-logo

15 July 2010
Issue: 7426 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Stop & search halted

Section 44 stopped in its tracks by court ruling

The government has suspended the “stop and search” powers of s 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

Section 44 allowed assistant chief constables to secretly designate areas for stop and search, without suspicion by a police constable. Designations lasted 28 days but have been made on a rolling basis for years at a time.
The European Court of Human Rights ruled in January that s 44 violates the right to respect for private life guaranteed by Art 8, in Gillan and Quinton v the United Kingdom [2010] ECHR 28.

The case arose from an arms fair in the Docklands area of East London in September 2003 where journalists and peace protestors were subject to stop and search by police. A challenge revealed that the whole of Greater London had been secretly designated for stop and search without suspicion on a rolling basis since 2001.

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, says: “Liberty welcomes the end of the infamous s 44 stop and search power that criminalised and alienated more people than it ever protected. We argued against it for ten years and spent the last seven challenging it all the way to the Court of Human Rights.”

Law Society President Robert Heslett says: “Police powers must be proportionate and respect fundamental human rights, otherwise they are open to abuse and can risk creating disrespect of the police among law-abiding citizens.”

Announcing the new plans, Home Secretary Theresa May said: “To comply with the judgment, but avoid pre-empting the review of counter-terrorism legislation, I have decided to introduce interim guidelines for the police. I am therefore changing the test for authorisation for the use of s 44 powers from requiring a search to be ‘expedient’ for the prevention of terrorism, to the stricter test of it being ‘necessary’ for that purpose.”

 

Issue: 7426 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll