Stop and Search Monitoring

Report: 6
Date: 14 February 2011
By: Commander Territorial Policing Patrol Command on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an update of the Metropolitan Police Service use of Stop and Search powers.

A. Recommendation

That Members note the MPS Stop and Search update in response to the MPA Standing Quarterly Brief.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPS is required to provide a quarterly Stop and Search return to the Home Office. The most recent return for the 2nd financial quarter 2010/11 is attached as Appendix 1.

2. During the 2nd quarter, the total number of searches were as follows;

• 132,549 Section 1 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE)
• 13,636 Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (“CJPO”) (S60)
• 676 Section 44 Terrorism Act 2000 (this power expired on the 8th July 2010)
• 238 Section 43 Terrorism Act 2000

In addition there were 216,120 Stop and Account recorded during the same time period.

3. Compared to the 1st quarter 2010/11, PACE searches increased by 8% (10,015), S60 searches decreased by 12% (1,819), Section 43 searches increased by 44% (73). The total number of Stop and Account increased by 7% (14,382). The data on Section 44 is not comparable to the previous quarter because the power expired on 8th July 2010.

4. Section 60 of the CJPO 1994 confers on a police officer of the rank of Inspector or above the power to authorise officers to search a person without individual grounds for reasonable suspicion. The authority is based on intelligence that incidents involving serious violence may take place or that people are carrying dangerous instruments or offensive weapons in a specified area without good reason. As in previous updates Appendix 2 provides a breakdown of all S60 searches and all searches for pointed/bladed articles (defined under Section 139 Criminal Justice Act 1988) and weapons under Section 1 PACE. The majority of these searches are linked to Operation Blunt 2 activity.

Review of Section 60 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994

5. A review carried out by the MPS Compliance, Audit and Assurance Team on the use of S60 CJPO was undertaken in the latter part of 2010. The methodology included reviewing the previous inspection which took place in November 2007, interviews with authorising officers and examination of records to scrutinize the decision-making process. The inspection team found that authorising officers were clearly aware of their responsibilities when identifying localities and time periods for the use of S60 and that the decision-making process for S60 authorisations was an intelligence-led process. They also identified a level of unnecessary bureaucracy in relation to the measurement of impact on communities, where it was found that Community Tension Indicator reports completed weekly by Boroughs, contained sufficient information to meet the needs for each S60 authorisation. This made the completion of a separate Community Impact Assessment for each authorisation unnecessary.

This review made the following recommendations:

• Territorial Policing (TP) Patrol OCU fully implements Recommendation Four from the previous inspection in 2007 namely that ‘the TP Stop and Search Team review the effectiveness of the strategic use of S60.’
• TP Patrol OCU removes the requirement for a Community Impact Assessment to be completed and attached to the S60 authorisation form 5096 and that a copy of the weekly Tension Indicator relevant to that time period is attached instead. Compliance with this requirement should be monitored by TP Patrol OCU and evaluated at regular intervals.
• TP Patrol OCU liaises with BOCUs in order that the form 5096 is improved in relation to the way in which details of community consultation and debriefing activity are recorded. This will assist TP Patrol OCU to monitor the various consultation methods that currently exist on BOCUs, and to share good practice.

Recording Operation Blunt 2 Stops and Searches

6. The inclusion of a field on both the Stop and Search form (5090) and Personal Digital Assistant (PDA) Stop and Search application to determine searches undertaken under Operation Blunt 2 operations remains problematic. Work is ongoing to resolve concerns around potential costs involved in technology changes to PDA and Crimint +; the ability to disaggregate Stop and Searches carried out specifically as part of Operation Blunt 2 and the varying results of wildcard searches.

7. The form 5096 (authority under S60) does have a field to record the operation name, it would be feasible to determine which S60 searches are linked to Operation Blunt 2, although where there are multiple authorities linked to other operations, for example, Aragon or Neon, in the same geographical area, data accuracy may be undermined.

Community Engagement

8. A breakdown of community engagement activity by BOCU is attached at Appendix 3. Engagement activities during the 2nd quarter have included:

• An event centred on Stop and Search, Knife and Gun crime was held at the Damilola Taylor Centre (DTC) under the banner of Standing Up For Southwark. 140 Young people from across the borough were spoken with, in discussion groups, by parents of murder victims and police portfolio leads.
• A presentation was given to over 100 attendees at a Safer Neighbourhood Team (SNT) appreciation event in Camden.
• Stop and Search was discussed during a youth panel meeting at the PowerStation Youth Club in Richmond.
• A presentation with role plays by Woolwich Common SNT at a community event at Woolwich Arsenal Development.
• A series of workshops was conducted at local Scout groups and church youth groups in Greenwich by Eltham North SNT.
• Kidbrooke and Hornfair SNT attended the Samuel Montague Youth Centre to workshops and provide street awareness advice.
• A group of 12 teenagers from schools across Lewisham visited TSG4 base and entered into a question and answer session on Stop and Search.
• TSG5 attended The Hub Youth Club in Hounslow and engaged with young people aged 12-17 (who had previous involvement with police) in an open forum regarding Stop and Search.
• Met-Track had a Stop and Search input at a project in Bexley involving some of Bexley's most prolific offenders from Pupil Referral Units and Youth Offending Teams and who had also been identified as involved in knife crime and gangs. Stop and Search presentations were carried out by TSG officers and were well received.

Equality and Human Rights Commission

9. In March 2010 the EHRC published a report on Stop and Search, ‘Stop and Think’, which highlighted the MPS and four other forces as using Stop and Search powers in a way that is disproportionate and possibly discriminatory. Each force submitted detailed responses on their use of Stop and Search.

10. On Monday 29th November 2010 the EHRC wrote to Thames Valley Police and Leicestershire Constabulary, warning them of possible enforcement because neither force was able to adequately justify and evidence the disproportionate use of their Stop and Search tactics.

11. The EHRC is seeking additional information from West Midlands Police before deciding on what further steps are necessary.

12. The EHRC noted that the MPS and Dorset Police had embarked on the National Police Improvement Agency’s ‘Next Steps’ programme, designed to help overcome any potential discriminatory Stop and Search actions. The EHRC is not currently considering initiating any formal legal processes against the MPS or Dorset Police but will monitor the use of Stop and Search in these force areas and they will review the position in a few months.

Next Steps

13. The pilot for ‘Next Steps’ commenced on the 8th November 2010 in Lewisham with a series of workshops involving, Constables, Sergeants, Senior Management Team, intelligence unit and community members. The next stage will be over a 12-week period (to commence in early February 2011) and will involve the delivery of intelligence-led Stop and Search which will be measured together with its impact on community confidence. The process involves liaison with internal/external key stakeholders and the deployment of community observers and academic analysis/evaluation in a number of key areas. The results will determine the feasibility of further MPS roll-out.

Crime and Security Act 2010

14. The Crime and Security Bill has not yet been made an Act of Parliament but the Bill was debated in the House of Lords on 27th January and will be debated in the House of Commons on 2nd February. It is expected to be enacted by the end of March 2011. The Act will introduce the following changes to Stop and Search and Stop and Account:

• Reduced recording requirement for Stop and Search. The requirement as amended is to record date, time, place, ethnicity, object of search, grounds of search and identity of officers carrying out the Stop and Search. The requirement to record a person’s name (or a note otherwise recording their description) and a description of any vehicle searched is repealed as is the requirement to record whether anything was found and whether any injury or damage was caused.
• The time period for requesting a copy of a Search Record will reduce to “within 3 months from the date of the search”.
• The legislation details that, in arrest cases, the officer carrying out the search will be responsible for ensuring that a record of the search is made as part of the person’s custody record. The custody officer must ensure that the person is asked if they want a copy of the record and, if they do, that they are given a copy as soon as practicable.
• The Act abolishes the requirement for the recording of Stop and Account encounters. However, the legislation permits forces to continue to collect ethnicity data where there are local concerns within the force area. In order to provide meaningful ethnicity data it would be necessary to record the Self Defined Ethnicity (SDE), date and location at the very minimum.

15. The implementation of the Crime and Security Act and changes to PACE will impact on operational policing. The MPS will ensure it effectively communicates the changes to all personnel to ensure searches continue to be lawful.

16. Though the Act introduces a reduced recording requirement for Stop and Search, (i.e. the requirement to record a person’s name, or a note otherwise recording their description, and a description of any vehicle searched is repealed along with the requirement to record whether anything was found and whether any injury or damage was caused), the MPS will continue to record the majority of information it records now to enable continued scrutiny and accountability at a local level.

17. Despite repeated attempts by the MPS to obtain feedback from community and advisory groups on whether or not to continue recording Stop and Account encounters, the response has been very limited and the majority of responses have been ambivalent. There is strong interest in issues relating to Stop and Search, but it appears very little interest with Stop and Account. The feedback has emphasised that the quality of the encounter is the key issue and that officers should treat people with respect and communicate the rationale for any stop.

18. Before making a final decision on whether to cease or continue recording Stop and Account, the MPA/MPS will undertake an extensive consultation exercise over a 6 month period commencing January 2011.

Complaints

19. The Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) compiles data on complaints against MPS personnel relating specifically to Stop and Search. The number of allegations finalised arising from Stop and Search for the 12 month period November 2009 to October 2010 (broken down by Borough of incident) is attached at Appendix 4.

20. The most allegations Finalised (71) over the 12 month period were recorded in Lambeth, but this borough also had the highest number (46) of Unsubstantiated/Not Upheld allegations. Only one allegation was Substantiated/Upheld over the 12 month period.

21. Brent had the highest number (10) of Substantiated/Upheld allegations over the 12 month period out of a borough total of 40 allegations Finalised.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. The Metropolitan Police Service recognises that its ability to police with the confidence of all communities can be affected by how Stop/Search powers are used and how they are carried out. Specifically in relation to the Crime and Security Act 2010 an Equality Impact Assessment was carried out in the latter part of 2010. As previously mentioned the response was limited and therefore further consultation is planned to run from January to June 2011.

The use of Stop and Search in the MPS is directed by Policy and Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). The aim of the MPS Stop and Search Policy is to ensure that officers comply with the law, act within their powers and that all Stop and Search powers are used fairly, responsibly, without unlawful discrimination and with respect for people being searched. This Policy and SOPs are published in the public domain and are subject to regular review by the Stop and Search Team.

The MPS publishes the Monitoring Mechanism on a monthly basis on the Internet. This provides each BOCU’s data on Stop and Search and for the MPS as a whole. This allows Community Monitoring Groups (CMGs) to scrutinise the use of Stop and Search by their local BOCU and to hold them to account. It also allows for comparisons to be made by BOCUs against the rest of the MPS.

Each BOCU has completed an Equality Impact Assessment on their use of Stop and Search.

Operation Pennant, a performance framework for Stop and Search, provides London-wide scrutiny of Stop and Search. Disproportionality and arrest rates are scrutinised down to team and individual officer level.

Met Forward

2. MPS Stop and Search policy and Standard Operating Procedures support the Met Streets and Met Connect strands of Met Forward. Police officers out on patrol on the streets and on public transport, conducting Stop and Search, supports Met Streets to deal with the menace of gangs, guns and knives. Through the Community Monitoring Network, Stop and Search website, Operation Pennant, Stop and Search Strategic Committee and MPA Way Forward meetings, the MPS is supporting Met Connect by ensuring our communities are properly informed and engaged with regard to Stop and Search matters to deliver increased confidence in policing.

Financial Implications

3. It is likely that the implementation of the Crime and Security Act and subsequent updates to Stop and Search forms and computer systems will have financial implications for the MPS. However until firmer proposals are in place regarding the implementation of the Act, which is currently subject to further consultation, these cannot be quantified. The costs associated with this will therefore be outlined in further papers on Stop and Search powers once the way forward has been agreed.

Legal Implications

4. A review of Section 60 of the CJPO showed strong compliance with the statutory power but made the recommendations set out at para. 5 of Section B.

5. The relevant provisions for the Crime and Security Act 2010 are set out at para. 14 of Section B, however, para. 16 indicates that in order to continue to maintain accountability at a local level the MPS will continue to record information as indicated. Further extensive consultation will take place before a final decision is made in relation to the practice to be adopted in respect of Stop and Account.

6. Para. 12 of Section B of this report notes that the EHRC is aware that the MPS has embarked upon the National Police Improvement Agency’s “Next Steps” programme, and that EHRC will monitor the use of Stop and Search and review whether a proportionate approach is adopted. Section C of this report supports the contention that the MPS adopts a fair and proportionate approach to Stop and Search. EHRC has wide ranging powers under the Equality Act 2006 to take enforcement action in respect of the Race Equality Duty. The usual approach of EHRC is to encourage compliance through liaison and only to resort to formal enforcement as a last resort.

Environmental Implications

7. There are no environmental implications arising directly from this report.

Risk Implications

8. The MPS will need to monitor the introduction of the new legislation and changes to the codes of practice to ensure compliance and minimise any reputational risk caused by misuse of the powers.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Ted Henderson, Stop and Search Team, MPS

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback