WIREDGOV

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has published a new report on the use of stop and search powers at ports and airports as concerns over the use of the powers is debated in Parliament.

The experimental analysis looks at patterns in ethnicity of the examinations under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, and suggests that relatively high numbers of those examined are from certain ethnic backgrounds.

Based on this analysis, the Commission will be working with those responsible for these examinations to ensure they are following their own guidelines which prohibit discrimination on ethnic grounds in the exercise of this power.

The Code of Practice for Examining Officers under Terrorism Act 2000 states, in reference to Schedule 7, that examining officers must ‘ensure that the selection of persons for examination is not solely based on their perceived ethnic background’. 

The Commission’s comparison of the Schedule 7 data with various populations  suggests that it may be being used disproportionately against some ethnic groups, although the Commission has stressed that the statistical analysis is still experimental.

Schedule 7 powers can also only lawfully be used to determine if the particular individual being examined is ‘concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism’. However, people can be examined and subject to potentially highly intrusive questions about their political and religious beliefs and activities, as well as those of others in their community and family, without any prior suspicion. Other stop and search powers, such as Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence (PACE) Act 1984, require reasonable suspicion before someone is stopped.

The relatively high numbers of those examined from certain ethnic backgrounds raise concerns that there may not be sufficient limitations in place to prevent reliance solely on an individual’s ethnicity or country of origin as a reason for conducting the examination, particularly given that there is no requirement for reasonable suspicion.

In response to the Home Office consultation on Schedule 7 (2012) and in amendments proposed to the Anti Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill, the Commission has tabled an amendment to Schedule 7 that would require ‘reasonable suspicion' to allow for anyone to be examined for longer than one hour.

 
Mark Hammond, CEO of the Equality and Human Rights Commission said:

“Schedule 7 is a necessary and useful power in the provision of national security. If it is used intelligently and proportionately the police can protect the public against terrorist threats. However, stopping people based on stereotypes could lead to time and resources being misdirected and have a negative impact on relations with black and ethnic minority groups. 

“This research suggests there may be an imbalance in the use of Schedule 7 against ethnic minorities. We are also concerned by the fact that people can be detained for lengthy periods without the reasonable suspicion required for other stop and search powers.

“We have highlighted these concerns to government and will continue to work closely with them, parliamentarians and the police to address these issues.”

-Ends-
For further information please contact the media office on 0161 829 8102, out of hours 07767 272 818.

Notes to Editors:
1.The research briefing An Experimental Analysis of Examinations and Detentions under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000
(EHRC 2013) presents an analysis of data relating to Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000. This legislation provides powers in relation to port and border controls and permits passengers entering or leaving Great Britain or Northern Ireland to be stopped, questioned and detained in order to determine whether they are a terrorist. The briefing can be found here - http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/uploaded_files/research/Briefing_papers/research_briefing_8_final.pdf

2. The data provide information on the number of examinations carried out in each of the years 2010/11 to 2012/13 broken down by ethnic group, plus additional data on the use of Schedule 7 in airports in 2010/11. For the calculations in the report, data on Schedule 7 examinations are combined with ethnic group data from two sources: international air passengers from the Civil Aviation Authority's Passenger Survey and residents of England and Wales from the 2011 Census. Note that race disproportionality ratios are shown as simple numbers since the addition of ':1' is unnecessary.
3. Difficulties were encountered in obtaining suitable passenger data broken down by ethnic group for comparison with the Schedule 7 data which is why the work is ‘experimental’. While relevant for comparison with airports data, the CAA Passenger Survey covers only air passengers and so is less appropriate for comparison with the all ports data. It also has a high proportion of missing data for the ethnic group question. Similarly, data on the resident population cannot take account of the different frequency with which people travel abroad and does not include visitors.
4. Of those data sources considered, the most appropriate survey in terms of coverage of the target population is the International Passenger Survey. However this survey does not collect data on ethnic group.
5. The amendments to the Antisocial Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill proposed by the EHRC are set out in the briefing Equality and Human Rights  Commission Parliamentary Briefing  Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill  Committee Stage briefing (EHRC November 2013)