|
An Unofficial website concerning the Liberty legal challenge of police anti-terror searches at DSEi protests. |
FULL TEXT GOVERNMENT COMMENT PAGE - (updated at 11 July 2004 - still needs to be further updated, sorry)
This page has full text references to current government comments on the misuse of police anti-terror search powers at DSEi. This page has the complete text of all government comments and is approximately 21 pages long on A4 sized paper. If you wish to go to the original Government Comment page (which has only a reference and link for each government comment), click here. Please also visit the early Government Comment page which features comment that pre-dates the policing of DSEi 2003 (including Jack Straw's confident assertions that the Terrorism Act wasn't going to be used to deter protest 14/12/1999).
Home Affairs Select Committee - Minutes of Evidence (11th September, 2003)
Blunkett questioned about Section 44 searches by David Winnick at Q52-Q65
Q52 David Winnick: Is it not important, Home Secretary, that the Anti-terrorism Act 2000 should be used for combatting terrorism and not for dealing with demonstrators who appear to have absolutely no relationship with terrorism at all?
Mr Blunkett: I think if people display no discernible threat of terrorism and there is no belief they are in any way to be concerned with terrorism then we should use Public Order legislation.
Q53 David Winnick: In which case why is it that those who were demonstrating, and surely they had every right to demonstrate, at the Arms Fair were in fact being faced with police who were using anti-terrorism legislation?
Mr Blunkett: We distinguish between those who do pose a threat beyond public order and those who do not.
Q54 David Winnick: Are you justifying what the police were doing?
Mr Blunkett: Actually we need to be very clear about this, it is not my role to justify what they have done, it is my role to request from them and to hold them to account if they get it wrong which is why I have asked them to report to me quickly on the use of Section 44. Initial findings overnight indicate that two non-British nationals were picked up and that the police believed that they were justified in doing so under the Terrorism Act and under Section 44. I need to know whether other people on whom the Act was applied were justified as opposed to public order.
Q55 David Winnick: When do you expect the police to report to you?
Mr Blunkett: By next week.
Q56 David Winnick: Home Secretary, earlier this year those who were demonstrating at RAF Fairford were also apparently being confronted by the police who used the act which I mentioned, so what happened apparently at the Arms Fair this week was not the first time that this has occurred.
Mr Blunkett: No, but I would entirely support—having investigated their actions—the use of the counter-terror legislation in relation to preventing people with potentially dangerous weapons and with intent from achieving their goal without being stopped and searched and dealt with appropriately. The information on websites and on the network news on the intent and objective which was displayed by some of those on their way to Fairford was a dangerous situation which could have got out of hand, not least in terms of obviously having to protect not just those on the base but the materials and equipment that were being dispatched at the time.
Q57 David Winnick: Home Secretary, would you recognise there are Members of Parliament as well as many public at large who do support, as I have done, and as I have stated in the House of Commons, for obvious reasons the Anti-terrorism Act but nevertheless are at this moment somewhat concerned that such an act can be used against those who are claiming their right, and in my view rightly so, to protest against what they see as a wrong and, if I can say, in no way connected with terrorism?
Mr Blunkett: I have agreed with you already. I think the balance is crucial if people are to have confidence when we do use the legislation, either the Terrorism Act on the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act, and we need to use it. I talked about this in the Commons on a number of occasions, it is important that those in charge of the operation have operational responsibility. There has not been a Home Secretary in history—there have been one or two who gone to events in top hats—who has actually believed that they could take operational responsibility, nor should they, because nobody would be able to take a single measure without referring back.
Q58 David Winnick: Can I just ask you in conclusion on this aspect, do you think there is a danger that the Anti-terrorism Act will be discredited if indeed it used in the way I have described? Liberty are very concerned about this.
Mr Blunkett: If it were repeatedly used in a way that was subsequently found to be inappropriate then yes it would.
Q59 Chairman: For the benefit of the Committee, the public and the press you refer to weapons taken to RAF Fairford.
Mr Blunkett: I am talking about cudgels and swords, I am not talking about machine guns and ground-to-air missiles.
Joint Committee on Draft Civil Contingencies Bill - Minutes of Evidence (16 September 2003)
Ms Shami Chakrabarti, Director, Liberty and Dr Eric Metcalfe, Director of Human Rights Policy, Justice, examined as witnesses. See Q188 for Chakrabarti's reference to Section 44 searches.
Q188 David Wright: Can I also extend the Committee's welcome. I want to cover a bit of background to begin with, could you give some examples of where civil liberties have been affected in previous emergencies, apart from cases in Northern Ireland. Some of the highlights.
Ms Chakrabarti: If I may say so there is an example that emerged in a public debate just last week. Members of this Committee may be aware of the use of Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 under which an authorisation has been made and confirmed, made by the Metropolitan Police and confirmed by the Home Secretary. The test in that statute is expedient to the prevention of acts of terrorism and searches by police officers, stop and search powers are activated on the part of police officers without suspicion. That is an emergency measure of a fashion and of course my organisation has concerns that the authorisation has been made inappropriately and that peaceful protestors have been impeded under that inappropriate and we say unlawful authorisation. I make that point by way of introduction because it is a graphic illustration, perhaps, of the dangers of passing fairly broad brush emergency legislation, the legislation being fairly loose in its drafting on the understandable basis of trust in the Executive, the trust being that of course these powers will never be used inappropriately, they are there for very serious circumstances. The point I would make about that example is that one does not need to suggest bad faith or conspiracy or even a deliberate attempt to undermine civil liberties, there is just always danger in passing extraordinary powers.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 410 Part No. 137 (16 September 2003)
Column 662W - Anti-terrorism Legislation (16 September 2003)
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the use of anti-terrorism legislation against the protesters at the Excel Exhibition Centre in East London on 9 September. [129947]Mr. Blunkett: I have called for an immediate report, to be with me by 18 September, into the use of Section 44 stop and search powers during the policing of the DSEi exhibition at the Excel Exhibition Centre in London.
It would be inappropriate to comment further until I have had an opportunity to consider the report.
House of Lords Debate (18 September, 2003)
House of Lords: Docklands Arms Fair: Arrests (column 1054)
11.30 a.m.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Hylton regrets that he cannot be present this morning. On his behalf, and at his request, I beg leave to ask the Government the following Question:
The Question was as follows:
To ask her Majesty's Government whether arrests were made at the arms fair in Docklands under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or under other terrorism provisions; if so, how many persons were arrested and why; and how many were charged.
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): My Lords, no arrests were made under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. For clarification, Section 44 of the Terrorism Act is a stop and search power, not an arrest power. Two individuals were arrested under Section 41 of the Terrorism Act on 8th September, the eve of the arms exhibition. They were subsequently released from the Terrorism Act provisions.
The Countess of Mar: My Lords, I am sure my noble friend will be grateful for that reply. He has asked me to ask the Minister whether the use of the Section 44 stop
and search powers were specifically authorised by the Home Office, or was there a blanket authorisation for London over that period. Does not the Minister regard the use of such powers on peaceful demonstrators a serious erosion of civil rights?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, as I explained, no arrests were made under Section 44. Two individuals were arrested under Section 41. I know that the difference between the two sections has caused difficulties in the past. As regards authorisation, my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Home Affairs is responsible for designation, but operational issues are of course a matter for the Metropolitan Police.
Lord Dholakia: My Lords, is the Secretary of State responsible for authorisation? If such an authorisation was given to the police, did it apply to the whole of London or only Docklands, and is it still in force?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, any complaint alleging misuse of police powers will be investigated by the Metropolitan Police. There is a procedure under the Terrorism Act that allows an individual to request reasons. The Home Secretary has asked for a reply in relation to those matters.
The role of the Secretary of State is to confirm whether it is appropriate for Section 44 powers to be put in place. The Government's position is that those powers should be applied correctly during police operations in strict compliance with the legislation; that is, for counter-terrorism purposes only.
Earl Attlee: My Lords, does the Minister agree that, by its very nature, the defence exhibition was vulnerable to terrorist attack?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I am sorry. I did not hear the last part of the question put to me by the noble Earl, Lord Attlee. Would he be kind enough to repeat it?
Earl Attlee: My Lords, does the Minister agree that, by its very nature, the exhibition was vulnerable to terrorist attack and that therefore precautions should have been taken?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I wholeheartedly agree with the noble Earl that it is absolutely critical to take precautions in those circumstances. We believe that appropriate action was taken in order to keep safe all those who visited the site.
Lord Elton: My Lords, I did not quite understand the reply of the noble Baroness to the question put by the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia. His question was whether the powers used required the authorisation of the Secretary of State. If so, was that authorisation supplied and over how wide an area?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, all Section 44 applications are scrutinised. If there were any indication that a police force intended to use those powers in a way not compliant with the legislation, the Home Secretary would not confirm their use. The situation was that the powers were used properly.
I have tried to explain a number of times that there was no use of Section 44 on that occasion and that the arrests took place under Section 41. If it helps, I shall be happy to describe the difference between the two sections because I know that this matter seems to be causing a little confusion. However, I notice that noble Lords do not want me to do that. I am more than content.
Lord Hodgson of Astley Abbotts: My Lords, can the noble Baroness explain why counter-terrorism legislation was used rather than the wider public order legislation that is available in all cases?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, what is absolutely important is that appropriate action was taken to keep London safe. Noble Lords will know that since 1998 a number of incidents have taken place right across London. It is right that there should reviews of whether the continuance of the relevant actions is proper, and those have taken place.
Lord Lloyd of Berwick: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the problem with Section 41 of the Terrorism Act 2000, under which the arrests were made, is that it enables the police to arrest someone even though he has not committed, or is not thought to be about to commit, any specific offence? That seems to illustrate the dangerously wide nature of Section 41, to which I have drawn attention before.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, of course, I hear what the noble and learned Lord says. The noble and learned Lord also well knows that we held quite intensive debates on the balance that must be borne in mind before the proper exercise of powers under Section 41. It was for that reason that the noble Lord, Lord Carlile of Berriew, was invited properly to keep under review the provisions, and that does work.
I do not think that I have yet said clearly that Section 44 was used in the generality, but in relation to the arrests—which was the purport of the Question—it was Section 41.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 410 Part No. 139 (6 October 2003)
Column 1204W - Anti Terrorism Measures (6th October 2003)
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will hold an inquiry into how anti-terrorism legislation is performing, with specific reference to the monitoring of police use of that legislation. [130579]Mr. Blunkett: All current anti-terrorism legislation—the Terrorism Act 2000 and the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001—is subject to independent review.
The Terrorism Act 2000 is reviewed annually by an independent reviewer who is currently Lord Carlile of Berriew QC. This is a statutory requirement and a report of his review will be laid before both Houses.
The powers contained within the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 are currently being reviewed by a committee of nine Privy Counsellors chaired by Lord Newton of Braintree. This is also a statutory requirement and is scheduled to be completed by 13 December this year.
Both reports will be comprehensive reviews of the operation of the powers under the legislation.
In addition, where specific concerns arise, I have sought reviews from the relevant force and they in turn have taken appropriate steps to review their own operational procedures.
Column 1242W - Peaceful Demonstrations (6th October 2003)
Mr. Letwin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the use of powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 in relation to peaceful demonstrations. [130221]Mr. Blunkett: Powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 are available to police to prevent acts of terrorism, and to aid investigation into terrorist activities. The use of such powers at any demonstration should be only for these purposes.
Where specific concerns arise, I have sought reviews from the relevant force and they in turn have taken appropriate steps to review their own operational procedures.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 411 Part No. 141 (14 October 2003)
Column 121W - Arms Sales Exhibition (Excel Centre) (14 Oct 2003)
Llew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost was of policing the arms sales exhibition at the Excel Centre in London. [130294]Mr. Ingram: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 18 September 2003 Official Report, column 950W to the hon. Member for Twickenham (Dr. Cable). The final cost remains to be established.
[Note: the 18 September response refered to in this answer itself contains a reference to a previous answer given to Jeremy Corbyn on 20 May 2003]
House of Lords Written Questions - Volume No. 653 Part No. 149 (14 October 2003)
Column WA106 - Defence Systems and Equipment International (14 October 2003)
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government: What was the total cost to public funds, including expenditure on policing and security, of the recent Defence Systems and Equipment International (DSEI); and what benefits they estimate to have accrued to the British economy.[HL4625]The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Bach): The direct cost to the Ministry of Defence identified centrally has been estimated at some £400,000. The final cost remains to be established.
The Metropolitan Police estimate a total of £1.48 million in additional pay and other costs associated with policing the event. British Transport Police estimate their cost of policing the event as £250,000. As above, the final cost remains to be established.
The benefits to the UK economy were evidenced by the presence of a large number of UK exhibitors, who were able to take advantage of the increased opportunities to show and discuss their equipment, and to allow those with current sales campaigns under way to progress their interest. Benefit will also have arisen from the attendance of more than 20,000 visitors, including official defence delegations, travelling to, or staying in, the capital.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 411 Part No. 141 (15 October 2003)
Column 260W - Lawful Protests (RAF Fairford) (15 October 2003)
Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department on how many occasions police officers used powers provided by the Terrorism Act 2000 during protests at (a) RAF Fairford and (b) the Mining Bomb Store at Welford, Berkshire. [130344]Ms Blears: Gloucestershire Police inform me that, during the period 6 March to 27 April 2003, the stop and search powers conferred by authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 were used on a total of 2,132 occasions in the vicinity of RAF Fairford. The police also used their powers under section 45(2) to seize articles from 28 of those who were stopped. One arrest was made under section 41 of the Act. I understand that none of the other powers in Part V of the Act were used.
Thames Valley Police inform me that during the period 1 March to 22 April 2003, the stop and search powers conferred by authorisations under section 44 of the Act were used on 41 occasions in the vicinity of the Mining Bomb Store at Welford, Berkshire. One arrest was made under section 41 of the Act. I understand that none of the other powers in Part V of the Act were used.
Column 261W - Terrorism (15 October 2003)
Mr. Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many notices under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 he has signed this year relating to (a) London and (b) the rest of England; and if he will make a statement. [131300]Mr. Blunkett: So far this year the use of section 44 powers has been confirmed on 20 occasions within London. The power has been confirmed on 125 occasions for the rest of England.
This is an important power and the Government are adamant it must be used appropriately and proportionately.
Column 262W - Policing (15 October 2003)
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what (a) proportion and (b) total amount of (i) total Government spending and (ii) gross domestic product was spent on policing in each of the last five years; and what the projected proportion of total Government spending is in the next two years. [121967]Ms Blears: The information available for the United Kingdom is set out in the table.
Total managed expenditure (TME) Money GDP UK public spend on police functions Spend on police as a proportion of TME Spend on police as a proportion of money GDP Year £ billion £ billion £ billion Percentage Percentage 1998–99 333.3 868.6 8.9 2.7 1.0 1999–2000 343.6 918.2 9.2 2.7 1.0 2000–01 366.8 962.6 9.7 2.6 1.0 2001–02 389.6 1,005.0 11.2 2.9 1.1 2002–03 421.0 1,056.2 (4)12.1 2.9 1.1 2003–04 455.7 1,108.4 n/a n/a n/a (4) Estimated outturn
Sources: Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses 2003 and Treasury.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 411 Part No. 143 (20 October 2003)
Column 416W - Terrorism Act (20 October 2003)
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many stops and searches have been carried out during 2003 by each police force in the UK under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. [131585]Mr. Blunkett: Figures on stops and searches under Section 44(1) and Section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 are published annually in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin. The latest published figures are for the financial year 2001–02. These are set out in the table. Figures for 2002–03 are due to be published in November this year. Figures for 2003–04 will be published when the relevant data has been collated and verified.
Table P3 Searches of vehicles and occupants under section 44(1) and searches of pedestrians under section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000(5) and resultant arrests, by police force area
England and Wales 2001–02 Number
Stops and searches of vehicles and occupants under 44(1) Stops and searches of pedestrians under 44 (2) Police force area Searches Resultant arrests Searches Resultant arrests Avon and Somerset — — — — Bedfordshire 8 — — — Cambridgeshire — — — — Cheshire 385 4 2 — Cleveland — — — — Cumbria — — — — Derbyshire 20 — — — Devon and Cornwall 129 — — — Dorset — — — — Durham 235 — 3 — Essex — — — — Gloucestershire 36 — — — Greater Manchester 36 1 — — Hampshire 0 — — — Hertfordshire 4 — — — Humberside — — — — Kent 55 — — — Lancashire — — — — Leicestershire 8 — 8 — Lincolnshire — — — — London, City of 3,409 92 86 8 Merseyside — — — — Metropolitan police 3,598 63 473 11 Norfolk 2 — — — Northamptonshire — — — — Northumbria — — — — North Yorkshire 8 — — — Nottinghamshire — — — — South Yorkshire 263 — — — Staffordshire — — — — Suffolk — — — — Surrey 1 1 1 — Sussex 767 1 310 T Thames Valley — — — — Warwickshire — — — — West Mercia 5 — — — West Midlands — — — — West Yorkshire — — — — Wiltshire — — — — Dyfed Powys — — — — Gwent — — — — North Wales — — — — South Wales — — — — Total 9,239 169 947 20 (5) Formerly section 13A and 13B of the Prevention of Terrorism (Temporary Provisions) Act 1989 and repealed under the Terrorism Act 2000 which came into force on 19 February 2001.
Column 417W - Terrorism Act (20 October 2003)
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many of those stopped and searched during the current year under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 have been (a) arrested, (b) charged with an offence and (c) charged with a terrorism offence. [131586]Mr. Blunkett: The data collected on stops and searches made under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is not automatically cross-referenced by the forces with the data they hold on arrests or on those charged. This information could therefore be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 411 Part No. 145 (22 October 2003)
Column 636W - Terrorism Act (22 October 2003)
Mr. Gerrard: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when, and for what areas, he has signed authorisations for the use by the police of section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. [131584]Ms Blears: The use of the section 44 Stop & Search power is authorised by a senior police officer of at least the rank of Assistant Chief Constable. The role of the Secretary of State is to confirm those authorisations.
Between 19 February 2001 and 30 September 2003 a total of 653 authorisations by a senior police officer under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 received confirmation from the Secretary of State. 583 of these relate to English police forces, and 70 to Welsh police forces.
It has been a longstanding policy of this and previous administrations not to comment on anti-terrorist operations. To provide a more detailed breakdown of the areas and times covered by Section 44 authorisations would put into the public domain, information that could prove valuable to terrorists.
Many forces run short term, localised operations for a variety of situations, that are supported by section 44 powers. These can include protective security operations for events or VIPs, intelligence gathering operations or measures taken in response to intelligence and threat assessments. To disclose detailed information on the times and locations of such operations could compromise their future effectiveness.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 412 Part No. 148 (28 October 2003)
Mr. Blunkett: The Metropolitan police and City of London have authorised the use of stop and search powers under the Terrorism Act since it came into force on 19 February 2001. The powers have been authorised in respect of the whole of each force area since that time in accordance with the statutory procedures.
The decision to authorise use of the powers is made against the background of the current threat level and the assessment of the risk to any designated or whole force area. Authorisations are only confirmed on a monthly basis if the Secretary of State is satisfied that their use is necessary to prevent acts of terrorism.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 412 Part No. 149 (29 October 2003)
Column 270W - Terrorism (29 October 2003)
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what guidance he has given to the police on publicising the fact that powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 are in operation in the local area. [133967]Ms Blears: The publicising of the use of section 44 powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 in any particular area is an operational decision for the force concerned. Any decision to publicise the fact that the powers are being used would be made in light of the operational objective, and mindful of the need to ensure that the information released can not be exploited by those intent on committing acts of terrorism.
That said there is a legal requirement under section 45 of the Terrorism Act to inform any individual who is stopped and searched under section 44 that he or she has been stopped and searched under that section of the Act.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 413 Part No. 159 (17 November 2003)
Column 712W - Terrorism Act 2000 (17 November 2003)
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 received in the last three years have been (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful. [138506]Mr. Blunkett: Home Office records show that since the Terrorism Act came into force on 19 February 2001, 678 stop and search authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2001 have been confirmed. Of these there have been two instances where the powers have not been confirmed by the Secretary of State.
Each authorisation is given full consideration. They are confirmed only if the Secretary of State is satisfied that their use is necessary to prevent acts of terrorism as set against the background of the current threat level.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 413 Part No. 460 (18 November 2003)
Column 828W - Excel Exhibition Centre Protesters (18 November 2003)
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his Answer to the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd) of 16 September 2003, Official Report, column 662W, whether he has received the Metropolitan Police report; whether he intends to publish it; and if he will make a statement on the use of anti-terrorism legislation against the protesters at the Excel Exhibition Centre in London on 9 September. [139254]
Fiona Mactaggart: I received an interim report from the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 18 September and a final report on 15 October. The report shows that what happened during the policing of the Defence Systems and Equipment International (DSEi) arms fair has not been routinely replicated across the force area from the time that the Terrorism Act 2000 came into force.
I welcome the steps that have been already been taken to deal with concerns at force level about the use of this power and the enhanced guidance and training that will be given to officers from this point on. I have also agreed with the MPS that we continue to be vigilant and ensure that these powers are deployed correctly.
Column 843W - Terrorism Act (18 November 2003)
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 4 November 2003, Official Report, column 575W, on the Terrorism Act, if he will break down the number of stop and searches under section 44 (1) and section 44 (2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 by (a) ethnicity and (b) gender in each year. [139267]Mr. Blunkett [holding answer 17 November 2003]: The data collected on stops and searches made under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is not automatically cross-referenced with data on the ethnicity and gender of those stopped. This information could be collated and verified only at disproportionate cost.
Column 843W - Terrorism Act (18 November 2003)
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many applications for authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 have been received from (a) Avon and Somerset, (b) Merseyside, (c) West Midlands, (d) South Wales and (e) Northumbria police forces. [138507]Mr. Blunkett: The applications received from the listed forces for the authorisation of section 44 powers are as follows.
Listed forces Applications Avon and Somerset Police 3 Merseyside Police 7 West Midlands 19 South Wales Police 17 Northumbria Police 2
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 413 Part No. 462 (20 November 2003)
Column 1185W - Terrorism (20 November 2003)
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many stop and searches under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 have been carried out since demonstrations began at RAF Fairford; what the charges against those arrested were; and how many have resulted in successful prosecutions. [139088]Ms Blears: I will write to my hon. Friend and place a copy of my letter in the Library.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 415 Part No. 12 (16 December 2003)
Column 867W - Police (16 December 2003)
Mr. Oaten: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list those police forces in which authorisations under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 are in place; and which of these areas have been subject to rolling monthly authorisations during 2003. [143383]Mr. Blunkett: There are currently 14 section 44 authorisations in place. However, the publicising of the use of the powers in any particular area is an operational decision for the force concerned. Any decision to publicise the fact that the powers are being used would be made in light of the operational objective, and mindful of the need to ensure that the information released cannot be exploited by those intent on committing acts of terrorism.
Each authorisation is given full consideration and confirmed only if I am satisfied that their use is expedient to prevent acts of terrorism as set against the background of the current threat level.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 416 Part No. 22 (15 January 2004)
Column 894W - Terrorism Act (15 January 2004)
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many times the police have used powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000; how many individuals this involved; and if he will make a statement. [145288]Mr. Blunkett: Figures on stops and searches under section 44(1) and section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 are published annually in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin.
During the financial year 2001–02, police conducted a total of 9,239 stops and searches under section 44(1) of the Act and 947 stops and searches under section 44(2). During the financial year 2002–03, police conducted a total of 27,313 stops and searches under section 44(1) of the Act and 4,774 stops and searches under section 44(2). Figures for 2003–04 will be published when the relevant data has been collated and verified.
The above data relates to the number of times police exercised powers under section 44 of the Act. Information on the number of individuals involved is not collated centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 417 Part No. 28 (27 January 2004)
Column 268W - Terrorism Act (27 January 2004)
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his Answer of 15 January 2004, Official Report, column 894W, on the Terrorism Act, if he will break down, by region, the stops and searches carried out since 2001 under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000; what reasons were given for using these powers; and what assessment he has made of the reasons for the increases. [150329]
Mr. Blunkett: A breakdown of stop and searches by Police Force area under section 44(1) and section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 for the financial years 2001–02 and 2002–03 is provided in the table. This is taken from information published in the Home Office Statistical Bulletin.
Stop and Searches under Section 44(1) or (2) may only be exercised for the purposes of searching for articles of a kind which could be used in connection with terrorism. The decision to authorise use of the powers is made against the background of the current threat level and the assessment of the risk to any designated or whole force area.
The increase in stops and searches can be attributed to an increase in general security throughout the year following September 11 (2001).
(8) Stops and searches of vehicles and occupants and pedestrians are not separately available for 2002–03
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 417 Part No. 35 (5 February 2004)
Column 1042W - Terrorism Act (5 February 2004)
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 27January, Official Report, column 268W, on the Terrorism Act 2000, what research he has (a)commissioned and (b)evaluated on the ethnic origin of the individuals who have been stopped and searched under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000. [152399]Mr. Blunkett: No independent research has been commissioned by the Home Office on the ethnic origin of the individuals who have been stopped and searched under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
Neither is the data routinely collected on stops and searches made under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 automatically cross-referenced with data on the ethnic origin of those stopped. This information could only be collated and verified at disproportionate cost.
Column 1042W - Terrorism Act (5 February 2004)
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to his answer of 27January, Official Report, column 268W, on the Terrorism Act 2000, how many (a)arrests and (b)prosecutions have directly resulted from stop and searches carried out under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in (i) 2001–02 and (ii) 2002–03. [152400]Mr. Blunkett: The table gives details of stops and searches under section 44(1) and 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 and resultant arrests.
Year Total searches Resultant arrests (i) 2001–02 10,200 189 (ii) 2002–03 32,100 380 This information is taken from the Home Office Statistical Bulletin Arrests for Notifiable Offences and the Operation of Certain Police Powers under PACE. England and Wales 2002–03.
Data collected on stops and searches is not routinely cross-referenced with the data held on prosecutions. This information could only be collated and verified at disproportionate cost.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 417 Part No. 36 (6 February 2004)
Column 1121W - Police (6 February 2004)
Mr. Nigel Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many stop and search warrants were made by police under the Terrorism Act 2000 in Gloucestershire in 2003, and how many of these resulted in (a)subsequent court action and (b)conviction. [152979]Mr. Blunkett: Figures on stops and searches under section 44(1) and section 44(2) of the Terrorism Act 2000 are published annually in a Home Office Statistical Bulletin.
The latest published figures are for the financial year 2002–03 and show that in the area of Gloucestershire constabulary, police conducted a total of 898 stops and searches under section 44(1) of the Act resulting in three arrests. 299 stops and searches under section 44(2) were carried out, resulting in nine arrests. Figures for 2003–04 are not yet available.
The data collected on stops and searches made under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 are not automatically cross-referenced by police forces with the data they hold on those charged. Therefore, this information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Draft Terrorism Act 2000 (Continuance of Part VII) Order 2004 (First Standing Committee) - (26 February 2004)
Jane Kennedy presents findings about anti-terror searches in Column Number 16 (26 February 2004)
Jane Kennedy: The hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland discussed the stop and search powers and how we use them. Lord Carlile has said that he will keep a close eye on the use of that power in the coming year. He commends the high quality of administration and supervision—the oversight—of the use of that power. I, too, will take a keen interest in his comments, and the matters to which hon. Members have referred. In my experience of how the power is used, it is different in Northern Ireland. We tend to use it when there is intelligence on a particular threat in a particular area. The effect of the power is to bring police and army resources on to the streets in the districts in which an attack is expected. Often, although there is disruption and inconvenience to the citizens who are affected by being stopped and searched, the increased activity in the area by the security forces diverts or disrupts the planned terrorist attack. There is quite a different impact, but the points made by hon. Members are valid. We will look at the figures and how the trends are developing.
The hon. Member for North Down asked a question on the Human Rights Commission and its input to Lord Carlile. Frankly, we do not know what it said in detail, because Lord Carlile is an independent reviewer. It would be for him to decide how to report comments put to him by bodies such as the Human Rights Commission. The hon. Lady may wish to discuss that further with the noble and learned Lord.
Blunkett's Answers to Written Questions - Volume No. 420 Part No. 80 (5 May 2004)
Column 1554W - Stop and Search (5 May 2004) - Please note, this is about the nature of non-terror searches at RAF Fairford - it is included here as a useful comparison with the Terrorism Searches that occured at Fairford.
Lynne Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 6 January, Official Report, column 328W [question # 144695] , on stop and search, how many arrests resulted from the 56 searches conducted between 6 March and 27 April 2003 under section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 in the vicinity of RAF Fairford. [166992]Ms Blears: There were no results resulting from the 56 searches conducted between 6 March and 27 April 2003 made under Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
Written Questions Submitted But Not Yet Answered -
Written Questions for Answer on Thursday 17 June 2004
168 - Dr Julian Lewis (New Forest East): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, for what reason the number of instances of stop-and-search under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 has risen in Hampshire between 2001-02 and 2002-03; and how many (a) arrests, (b) charges and (c) convictions have resulted from these in connection with (i) terrorist-related and (ii) non-terrorist-related suspected offences. (177982)Written Questions for Answer on Thursday 8 July 2004 (Questions to Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer)
129 - Simon Hughes (North Southwark & Bermondsey): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will review the operation of stop and search powers in England (a) generally and (b) under counter-terrorism legislation. (183120)Oral or Written Questions for Answer beginning on Monday 12 July 2004
142 - Mr David Drew (Stroud): To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many cases are outstanding from the stop and search orders issued under Section 44 of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 at the time of the use by the US Air Force of RAF Fairford. (183826)
USEFUL GOVT RELATED LINKS-
The Home Office, UK (website section with press releases, reports, and
publications)
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/terrorism/reports/
Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 Review
(this site features Liberty, FAIR, and Lord Carlile's submissions)
http://www.atcsact-review.org.uk
(CAMPACC submission to the Privy Council review of the legislation)
Terrorising Minority Communities: ‘Anti-Terrorism’ Powers: their Use
and Abuse
(Full statement of August 2003)
http://www.carf.demon.co.uk/pdf/campacc_submission.pdf