Powers given to police under PACE act 1984
Power to stop and search code A
Code C power of detention and treatment
Sources for police powers regarding investigation
PACE act 1984
Terrorism act 2000
Misuse of drug act 1971
Types of searches
Bodily search
Intimate search
Search of premises
Powers of stop and search under terrorism and Misuse act
Under the Drug Misuse Act 1971, police have the power to stop and search a person or
vehicle if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that controlled drugs are being carried
unlawfully. This allows officers to search bags, clothing, and vehicles in a public place. In
contrast, under the Terrorism Act 2000 (Sections 43 and 44), police can stop and search
individuals without reasonable suspicion in designated areas if authorised by a senior
officer, usually when there is a perceived threat of terrorism. These powers are broader than
under PACE or the Drugs Act and are intended to prevent acts of terrorism by locating
weapons or evidence of terrorist activity.
Time limit for which police detention
24 hours normally
36 hours indictable offences with the permission of senior officer
96 hours in case of terrorism with permission of magistrate
Identify five requirements of valid stop and search by the police
1. Reasonable grounds
2. Officer identification
3. Explanation of legal power and purpose
4. Written record/documentation
5. Respectful and lawful conduct
Discuss the rights of suspects detained in police station ?
Suspects detained in a police station in the UK have several key rights under the Police and
Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) to ensure fair treatment. One fundamental right is the
right to have someone informed of their arrest, which must be carried out as soon as
practicable. They also have the right to legal advice, either from a solicitor of their choice or
a duty solicitor, and this can’t be delayed without strong justification. Additionally, suspects
have the right to consult the Codes of Practice, which outline how they should be treated
during detention and questioning.
Within the first few hours, suspects also have the right to be treated humanely and
respectfully, including access to food, water, rest, and toilet facilities. They must be
informed of the reason for their arrest and their detention must be reviewed regularly,
usually within the first 6 hours and then every 9 hours. If the police want to question them, it
must be under caution, and interviews must be recorded. All these protections aim to balance
effective policing with the suspect’s civil liberties.
Assess to what extent to which these rights are protected
The rights of suspects in police custody are largely protected by PACE 1984 and its Codes of
Practice, which set clear standards for police conduct. In most cases, suspects are promptly
informed of their rights upon arrival at the station, including the right to legal advice and to
have someone notified of their detention. Access to a solicitor is free, and interviews must be
conducted under caution and recorded. These measures help prevent coercion or abuse during
questioning and are designed to ensure suspects are aware of and able to exercise their legal
rights effectively.
However, there are some limitations and concerns around how consistently these rights are
upheld. For instance, in certain situations, such as when there is a risk of evidence being
destroyed or someone being harmed, the police can delay access to legal advice for up to 36
hours under specific legislation (e.g. in terrorism-related cases). Additionally, not all suspects
fully understand their rights or the legal processes, especially vulnerable individuals or those
with mental health issues. While appropriate adults are supposed to be provided for such
detainees, this system is not always reliably enforced.
In practice, then, while the framework for protecting suspects' rights is strong, its
effectiveness depends on proper enforcement and oversight. Independent custody visitors
and the availability of complaint mechanisms help maintain standards, but some rights can
still be restricted or inconsistently applied. Therefore, although the legal protections exist, the
extent to which suspects' rights are fully upheld can vary depending on individual
circumstances and the professionalism of officers involved.