14% of stop and searches on ethnic minorities

Astounding statistics were released over the weekend showing that 14% of stop and searches under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in Scotland have been done on people of dark skin. This is despite them forming only 2% of the population.

The Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill has come out strongly against the regime operated by the British Transport Police in the country's railway stations. Since the Glasgow Airport attacks, nearly 15,000 people have been stopped ans searched, around 100 a day.

The issue made the front page of Saturday's Scotsman, although for some reason I can't find it anywhere on their webpage. The Herald also covered it, while you can watch more 10 minutes into the latest programme from the Politics Show (worth watching for the BTP's insistence that no one had complained, but mentioning that the Muslim Council had been invited in to see them last month after complaints - and during that meeting complaints to the BTP from people stopped and searched were mentioned).

You can see previous comment from me on this issue here and here. The policy of stop and search does not achieve anything. If it was just a waste of police time, that would be one thing. But the evidence from London over the last few years is that this just breeds resentment at the fact that more black and Asian people are stopped and searched. It would be worth debating whether this was acceptable if anything was achieved through the policy, but nothing is. This is unacceptable at a time when relations between police and communites need to be especially strong.

It's good to see serious opposition to stop and search before it becomes ingrained as part of policing culture in Scotland. Once that happens, it will be very hard to roll back. The Scottish police forces do not implement section 44 powers which I believe is because they know their harm to community relations. The BTP should cease it's implementation, follow the lead of the other forces, and stop jeopardising good relations between police and communities.

Comments

[Stuart]

Your post seems rather skewed in an odd direction. Complaining that the percentage of blacks and asians stopped and searched under terror laws is the problem (when the target of these searches is to stop Muslim extremism, I'm surprised it's only 14%) is rather like saying Guantanamo Bay is a disgrace because there aren't enough white people in it.

Both are disgraceful for reasons beyond racial demographics - S&S is a pointless waste of police resources designed to look tough to the public while carving a gulf between minority communities and the authorities.

[Random Guy]

In a bizarre twist, I just had my first stop and search today. I am above being angry about it, but the futility of such a method to prevent terrorism is unbelievable. At first I considered telling my work colleagues, but then decided not to. The emotions I felt ranged initially from surprise to mild anger, to some sort of vindication I suppose. I always wondered when something like this could happen. It also firmly cements to me that a muslim guy who regularly uses the trains and is seen every morning by loads of people, and whose actions can even be verified by any number of other methods, will remain a suspect to your average white 'senior' police officer who has the authority to stop you. Maybe it was the fact that Eid is being celebrated today in my City (and tommorrow as well), so they thought that heightened stop and search should be used?

While it was happening I refrained from making a smart-ass comment to the officer (the man was doing his job after all), and he even circled the little receipt to show me exactly which law I was being stopped under. All I can say is that if the best hope the security service have of looking for terrorists is to stop and search muslim males going to work in the morning, then I am deeply worried at the scale of anti-terror operations, or the lack of intelligence on which the security services are acting.

Stopping and searching to me is a major act, bordering on invasion of privacy. I am still working through my emotions, but the main one right now is a solidified sense of 'self': I am a muslim and no one can intimidate me.

[joe90]

Complaining that the percentage of blacks and asians stopped and searched under terror laws is the problem (when the target of these searches is to stop Muslim extremism, I'm surprised it's only 14%) is rather like saying Guantanamo Bay is a disgrace because there aren't enough white people in it.
- There is something odd about equating British law and order and British Bobbies carrying out their lawful duties, with that of Amercian concentration camps and torture chambers.

It is a very good point you make Stuart, about the lack of randomness in 'Stop and Search' suspects, and that it should be expected that 'dark-skin' people are going to be stopped more often than not.

I'm not quite sure about this argument though, and I can't quite put my finger on what it is - same with your analogy with Guantanamo detainees.

As you say Stuart, Guantanamo is a legal and moral disgrace and the fact of its very presence an atrocity itself. A war crime in fact.

British Bobbies are accountable for their actions, unlike those that run Gunatanamo. The fact that Bush's 'Global War on Terror' seems to be debasing even our own Police by allowing their activities to be compared to American concentration camps, even for the sake of argument, I find a bit worrying.

The fact is that if the British Transport Police know that 'Stop and Search' is a useless way to prevent terrorism, then why are they doing it knowing full well it is going to be seen as abusive towards certain sections of the community?

Anyway, they are very powerful points Stuart and worth thinking about.

all the best!

[Osama]

Stuart, I think your point is very valid, though I think we're saying the same thing but with different emphasis.

The difference between S&S and other human rights issues from Gitmo to ID cards is that they have a fair number of civic groups campaigning on them. This is not the case for S&S. In fact, you'll strangely find many people saying they don't mind it at all. This is because it doesn't humiliate them the same way it does for someone from an ethnic minority.

In the absence of society organising protest against the policy, which I think should happen, we're left pointing out the harm this does to relations between the police and minority communities.

[Stuart]

Osama - I completely agree that there is a wall of silence over S&S, perhaps because everyone would rather appear tough than risk claims they 'allowed' a future terror attack to occour through inaction.

However this current publicity of the issue, in almost all the articles I've read including the ones you quote, focuses on the 14% statistic. It makes us civil libertarians look obsessed with balancing the proportions rather than abolishing the practice!

[Osama]

Noted, Stuart. I'd add to my last post it possibly doesn't get as much focus because it's also the least dramatic of the civil liberties battles when pitted against 42 days, control orders etc. That said, maybe campaigners should tactically target the most vulnerable of the measures and on S&S politicians can't hide behind "intelligence says" because it's got nothing to do with information or logic.

[http://www.bnp.org.uk]

FOREIGNERS ARE FLOCKING TO BRITAIN, TAKING OUR HOUSES, OUR JOBS, BENEFITS AND OUR IDENTITY. NO WONDER HOUSES HAVE TO BE BUILT ON FLOODPLAINS AND WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO FUND WEEKLY BIN COLLECTIONS! I’M VOTING BNP AS I DON’T WANT TO BE AN ETHNIC MINORITY IN MY OWN COUNTRY IN THIRTY YEARS!