Yesterday the Court of Human Rights ruled that section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which gives the police broad powers to stop and search without suspicion, violates the right to respect for private life guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention on Human Rights.
In the case of Gillan and Quinton versus the United Kingdom, the Court found that: “…the powers of authorisation and confirmation as well as those of stop and search... are neither sufficiently circumscribed nor subject to adequate legal safeguards against abuse. ….They are not therefore “in accordance with the law”.”
The case arose from an arms fair in the Docklands area of East London in September 2003 where Pennie Quinton and Kevin Gillan (amongst many other journalists and peace protestors) were subject to lengthy stop and search and prevented from attending a demonstration.
After public consternation and parliamentary questions, it emerged that the whole of Greater London had been secretly designated for stop and search without suspicion on a rolling basis since 2001.
Corinna Ferguson, Legal Officer for the human rights group Liberty, acting for the applicants, said: “Liberty has consistently warned the Government about the dangers of stop and search without suspicion and actively campaigned for the tightening up of the infamous section 44 power. The public, police and Court of Human Rights all share our concerns for privacy, protest, race equality and community solidarity that come with this sloppy law. In the coming weeks, Parliamentarians must finally sort out this mess.”
Pennie Quinton commented: “There has to be a balance between private life and security. The Court has shown that section 44 is an invasion of people’s right to liberty and privacy.”
Kevin Gillan added:“It’s fantastic news after a long struggle. I look to the Government for a strong response.”
Last night the Home Office was unrepentant on the issue, and announced that it is likely to appeal to Europe.
Printer-friendly version