Police ‘must do more to minimise harm’ of stop and search powers

Police are more likely to stop and search people from ethnic minority backgrounds for weapons without suspicion, watchdogs have said.

Forces may “recognise the effects of disproportionality on people and communities” but “don’t take this matter seriously enough”, an investigation into the use of so-called suspicion-less section 60 stop and search powers concluded.

The probe was carried out by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) and the College of Policing (CoP) after campaign network the Criminal Justice Alliance (CJA) submitted a super-complaint amid concerns about the use of the powers.

Police “must do more to minimise harm” when deploying stop and search powers and better scrutinise their use, the findings published on Friday said, making 10 recommendations to chief constables for improvement.

Under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, a section 60 authorises police to stop and search people and vehicles, without suspicion, for offensive weapons or “instruments” considered dangerous in a specific neighbourhood of the force area for a set period.

The CJA – a 170-strong body of groups which campaigns for a fair and effective criminal justice system – made use of the Government’s super-complaint system which allows organisations to raise concerns on behalf of the public about “harmful patterns or trends in policing”.

The investigation “confirms that people from ethnic minority backgrounds are more likely to be stopped and searched under section 60” but “none of the forces that investigators engaged with could fully explain why”, the three watchdogs said.

Too many officers who sign off on section 60 searches, and those who conduct them, “aren’t receiving the training they need”, they added.

Investigators found “concerning examples” of standard practices not being applied and said forces should provide more training that meets national requirements.

Annette So, interim director of the CJA, said: “The report is an important step in acknowledging the failures in current policing practices, and we appreciate the diligence of the investigators in recognising substantial aspects of the case presented in our super-complaint.”

The CJA said the investigation failed to question anyone who had been subject to section 60 powers, claiming there was a “clear lack of credibility in the methodology” and emphasising the need for “diverse voices to be heard”.

A spokeswoman for the three bodies that carried out the review said a wide range of evidence had been taken into account and inspectors wanted to hear “directly” from people affected – trying “several approaches” –  but were “unable to find people who had been searched under this specific power who were willing to speak with us as part of the investigation”.

Ms So said the CJA’s work “shows that these groups and individuals are not hard to reach”, adding: “Conversations we have had recently only confirm the truly traumatising impacts these powers have.”

Inspector of Constabulary Wendy Williams said: “We know that, when used properly, section 60 stop and search can support the police response to serious violence. However, the use of the power can have detrimental effects on public trust and confidence in the police, particularly among black communities.

“It’s vital that forces understand the importance of using section 60 stop and search legitimately, proportionately and fairly. We found this was often the case, but we also saw a range of shortcomings. And these often mirrored the Criminal Justice Alliance’s concerns.”

The recommendations will help make sure “forces only use the power when necessary, use it effectively and evaluate its use”, she added.

Kathie Cashell, the IOPC’s acting deputy director general, said section 60 is an “important policing tactic” but is also an “intrusive” power which can have a negative impact on those subjected to it.

“Many of the findings from this investigation mirror those raised in previous reports and inquiries, so policing must ensure that it applies existing safeguards and effective community scrutiny, to minimise any harm when stop and search is used.

“If the police service is to build and retain confidence in its use of section 60 stop and search, more needs to be done to understand and evaluate its effectiveness and to explain this to communities where it is used.”

Andy Walker, the CoP’s head of uniformed policing, also highlighted the importance of the powers but said they must be used “lawfully, proportionately and fairly to ensure public trust and confidence in policing”.

He said the college will work with the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) to set “minimum requirements” for recording, briefing and reviewing decisions to authorise section 60 searches.

The NPCC welcomed the scrutiny of the powers and said it will “work through the report and its recommendations in detail, with a view to making the necessary changes as quickly as possible”.

Essex Police Assistant Chief Constable Andrew Mariner, who leads the NPCC’s work on stop and search, said the negative impact the powers can have, especially among black people, “has been stressed and we acknowledge that policing must do more to improve these experiences for the public”.

“It is vital that each police interaction is handled sensitively, in line with policy, and that we learn from those instances where we have not got that balance right,” he added.

The Home Office said it was “committed to supporting the police to use their powers to protect our communities” and will respond to the report’s recommendations in due course.

“We are updating stop and search safeguards to strengthen the trust between police and their local communities, and have consulted on improved scrutiny standards so the public can be confident these powers are being used clearly and transparently,” a department spokesman added.