The National Police Improvement Agency, on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers has now issued some updated advice:
Practice Advice on Stop and Search in relation to Terrorism (.pdf)
Every person searched under section 44 should be told explicitly that they are not suspected of being a terrorist.
This is rather misleading, since if you are stupid enough to allow the Police conducting a Terrorism Act 2000 section 44 stop and search to take your Name and Address etc, something which they have no power to demand under that particular section, but which they very often attempt to do, especially when completing the cumbersome paper Stop and Search Form (or the new, supposedly quicker electronic version), you will eventually have this data logged on an electronic database, which may well be handed over in bulk to foreign police and intelligence agencies.
This information could also be disclosed , to your detriment when applying for jobs, in future Criminal Records Bureau Enhanced Disclosures.
The "Good News" is that this NPIA / ACPO practice advice, which must surely form the basis of the training and operational briefing of Police Officers, specifically re-iterates that there are no restrictions on Photography or Digital Imaging conferred by the Terrorism Act 2000.
2.8 PHOTOGRAPHY
The Terrorism Act 2000 does not prohibit people from taking photographs or digital images in an area where an authority under section 44 is in place. Officers should not prevent people taking photographs unless they are in an area where photography is prevented by other legislation.
If officers reasonably suspect that photographs are being taken as part of hostile terrorist reconnaissance, a search under section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or an arrest should be considered. Film and memory cards may be seized as part of the search, but officers do not have a legal power to delete images or destroy film. Although images may be viewed as part of a search, to preserve evidence when cameras or other devices are seized, officers should not normally attempt to examine them. Cameras and other devices should be left in the state they were found and forwarded to appropriately trained staff for forensic examination. The person being searched should never be asked or allowed to turn the device on or off because of the danger of evidence being lost or damaged.
The only places where such "other legislation" currently seems to apply are "Prohibited Places" e.g. Military Bases, Licensed Nuclear Sites, Airports and offices owned by the Civil Aviation Authority e.g. Heathrow, offices or Telephone or Internet Exchanges owned by Communications Service Providers.
This list of Prohibited Places no longer includes many Government buildings and offices which have been sold off and leased back under Public Finance Initiatives etc.
It is possible for a Secretary of State to specifically "declare" a site as a "Prohibited Place" under the Official Secrets Act 1911, but, currently there do not seem to be any such special designations in force - see the results of our FOIA request: Current Prohibited Places under the Official Secrets Act 1911
The suggested Aide Memoire for Police Officers (i.e. sworn Police Constables in Uniform, or Police Community Support Officers who they are directly assisting them with the mechanics of a search, but not those PCSOs acting without a real Police Constable being physically present):
General Points
Terrorism powers must never be used for matters that are not related to terrorism.
Officers should take care to correctly record the power used on the record of search. Officers searching under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (but not section 43) can require subjects to remove footwear and headgear in public. (Officers should be aware of cultural sensitivities when requiring people to remove headgear .)
There is no power to stop people taking photographs or digital images in public places under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Terrorism powers of search should be conducted in accordance with the principles of Code A of PACE
It is interesting to note that the NPIA / ACPO seem to mandate some form of Community Impact Assessment, and telling the local Police Authority about areas which are subjected to the extraordinary Terrorism Act 2000 section 44 stop and search without reasonable suspicion powers, especially where they get renewed over and over again.
Communities should be informed of the existence and location of a section 44 authorisation - unless it is not operationally appropriate
This contrasts with the Home Office's refusal to divulge simply the approximate geographical extent and the times and dates of where and when these extraordinary, temporary powers, are in force. They are refusing to disclose any such information at all.
We have been waiting over a year for the Information Commissioner's Office to look into this stupid and counterproductive unnecessary secrecy for what is meant to be a deterrent power, exercised in public. - see our Spy Blog UK FOIA request category archive HO Terrorism Act 2000 s44 Authorisations
"Every person searched under (Terrorism Act 2000 ) section 44 should be told explicitly that they are not suspected of being a terrorist. "
Is this from the Ministry of Truth" ?
@ Edward - it is an astonishing statement, especially if they con you into recording your name and address, something which they have no legal power to do, under Section 44.
None of the people we have spoken to who have been "stopped and searched" under Section 44, feel that they are "not suspected of terrorism" as a result, and they now feel anger and resentment against the Police and the Government. It is easy to see how people who already felt that way could be tipped into supporting violent extremists, by such Section 44 harassment.
What use are unarmed Police Constables in Uniform (with or without unarmed PCSOs), if they actually find a terrorist armed with firearms or a bomb ?
Section 44 stop ad search checkpoints should be restricted to those rare locations and times when it is possible to justify the presence, physically on the spot, of heavily armed para-military Police snipers and marksmen, or military personnel in support, together with a bomb disposal team.
The unarmed Police Constables and PCSOs are, effectively, being treated as cannon fodder by their superiors.
I was forced/conned/tricked to give my name, address and date of birth when I was stopped and searched under this Act. I was told by the plain clothes police officer that he would go though my pockets and bag and read and write down details of what he found including credit cards and the like. These of course I had on me at the time. He did not ever tell me that I had the right to not provide my name, address and DOB.
I had been taking photos. He did read a notepad and by credit cards. I had already been forced to provide him my details by this stage.
The plain clothes police officer did not show me his warrant card, he only put his first name on the form, along with a police number, his witness on the stop and search form he wrote down as himself (though other uniformed police officers where nearby), again using his first name only. He lied about my actions on the form which were the supposed reasons for stopping and searching me, therefore I refused to sign the form.
I'm angry and worried now reading this spyblog story as I do wish to escape the UK in the next year by moving abroad to Switzerland. I have no criminal record and have never been arrested. I don't even have any car parking nor speeding tickets.
Can anyone reading this provide me any advice?
Need I be concerned?
Can I sue the police for wrongful and a false (or suchlike?) stop and search? I kept the copy of the stop and search form and can prove I was taking lovely fine non-risk photos as I still have them.
a PCSO told me he was giving me a “formal caution” then issued me with a stop & account form.
I am a white, English, 50+ years, disabled, born and bred English female. The PCSO then thrust two pieces of paper in my hand which were from 5090(X). The boxes ticked say I was “stopped as part of a pre-planned police operation” (code H) and the other an information leaflet on crimestoppers/terrorism. I believe this action was undertaken to manipulate the figures presented for “stop and account” in an attempt to artificially balance Minority group ‘stop and account’ episodes.
I was not disorderly, do not swear, did not hit out at anyone etc etc.
I will add that at the time this was happening I believed that the PCSO was a police constable as he was wearing an unmarked fluorescent jacket and it was too dark to see his cap badge. His appearance and manner strongly suggested to me that he was a police constable.
If anyone knows of an action group to progress this infringement of powers and intimidation of persons, I will quite happily take this forward? Surprisingly enough I can only locate contact points at the Metropolitan Police>
@ Vera Honey - A PCSO does not have any power to issue you with a "formal caution" !
http://www.policecommunitysupportofficer.com/phpBB2/powers.php
You could try complaining to the Independent Police Complaints Commission
http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/index/complaints.htm
You can also contact your local borough linked member of the Metropolitan Police Authority, which conducts enquiries into Stop and Search / Account etc. , especially the racial aspects of this.
http://www.mpa.gov.uk/about/members/link-members.htm
Lord Carlile of Berriew Q.C, the Independent Reviewer of Anti-Terrorism Legislation is also interested in
how Terrorism Act section 44 powers are being used or abused in practice.
email: carlilea@parliament.uk
I have the impression that police officers are confused between Sections 44-47 of the TA 2000 ('Power to stop and search') that could be used to stop anyone and Sections 40-43 ('Suspected terrorists') that is directed. It would appear that they use S44 for all stops and searches under TA 2000.
For example the 'Stops by the police' chapter of the Statistics on Race and the Criminal Justice System – 2006/7 is subdivided into 'Section 1 PACE [1984]', 'Section 60 [of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994]', '[s44 (1) and (2)] Terrorism Act 2000' and 'Stop and Account'.
So even though S43 starts with '43. - (1) A constable may stop and search a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist to discover whether he has in his possession anything which may constitute evidence that he is a terrorist.', it doesn't seem to be considered as a stop and search powers by many (officers and statisticians).
br -d
As a follow up on my previous posting of 7th Dec, can I take this matter up with a Solicitor? I would like my name and the "incident" removed from the UK Police Stop and Search Database.
Judging by:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_stop,_search,_detention_and_arrest_powers_in_the_United_Kingdom
I see the rights for Stop and Search relate only to "Any constable in uniform". I was stopped and searched by a Plain Clothes officer. So was this a clear misuse of the Stop and Search Act?
Please can someone comment to help me here?
@ Rob - only a Constable in Uniform or a Police Community Support Officer acting under the direct physical supervision of a Constable in Uniform can exercise a Stop and Search under the Terrorism Act 2000 Section 44, without reasonable suspicion.
As the NPIA guidance shows, there are plenty of other with reasonable suspicion powers which a police Constable (in uniform or not) has available.
There is every chance that this stop and search was not properly recorded, or may have been recorded on an intelligence database , access to which is too secret to be of real use to anyone.
Do the Swiss require you to get a police records check before letting you move there ?
http://www.met.police.uk/information/faq.htm#5
See the Request Forms for accessing information about yourself held by the MPS or the equivalent, if you live under a different local police force.
wtwu @29Jan Thank you very much for explaining it to me. Hopefully it was, as you say, perhaps not properly recorded.
It seems that the law for photographers in the UK is set to get far far worst.
See:
"New UK law comes into effect on 16th Feb: Arrest - and imprisonment - of anyone who takes pictures of police officers 'likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism'"
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=836675
Lots of comments at
http://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/7u6ua/new_uk_law_comes_into_effect_on_16th_feb_arrest/
I think the meeting on 4th February 2009 in London will be worth going to.
See:
Know your rights: Facing the police crackdown on public photography
http://www.londoncallingphotographers.org/wiki/London_Calling_Photographers%27_Meeting_4th_february_2009"
@ Rob - thanks for the link to the London Calling Photographers event
Comedian and activist Mark Thomas has some news about his long running official complaint about a stop and search of his wallet etc. he was unlawfully subjected to.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/03/civil-liberties-stop-and-search