Quasi-Policing

Leonard Jason-Lloyd

• Publisher: Routledge-Cavendish
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781135334475
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Law
• Subtopic: Law Theory & Practice
• Index: Law

Quasi-Policing provides an insight into the increasing use of civilians performing police and other public protection duties.

PART I:
THE DEVOLUTION OF PUBLIC PROTECTION DUTIES TO THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY

CHAPTER 1

AIRPORT SECURITY

In response to rising concerns regarding aviation security, the Protection of Aircraft Act 1973 was enacted. Part II of this Act, entitled ‘Protection of Aircraft, Aerodromes and Air Navigation Installations against Acts of Violence’, contained s 10 (repealed and subsequently expanded), which made the following provisions:

1. For the purposes to which this Part of this Act applies the Secretary of State may give a direction in writing to the manager of any aerodrome in the United Kingdom requiring him to use his best endeavours to secure that such searches to which this section applies as are specified in the direction are carried out by constables or by other persons¹ of a description specified in the direction.
2. The searches to which this section applies, in relation to an aerodrome, are searches—
   1. of the aerodrome or any part of it;
   2. of any aircraft which at the time is in any part of the aerodrome; and
   3. of persons or property (other than aircraft) which may at any such time be in any part of the aerodrome.

It will be noted that the words ‘other persons’ have been emphasised. This provision caused some concern, as illustrated in an extract from a letter sent by Inspector Reg Gale to the Home Secretary on 2 September 1973, in which he states:

When one takes personnel such as these who are not vetted,² selected or trained to the standards of a constable and who do not hold the office of constable, and places them in a situation where by law they have the right to detain and search members of the public, it must give cause for concern.³

The Protection of Aircraft Act was later repealed by the Aviation Security Act 1982, which under s 13 extended the powers of both the police and ‘other persons’ to search persons, property and vehicles, as well as aircraft. These provisions were extended yet further by a new s 13A, which was inserted by s 2 of the Aviation and Maritime Security Act 1990. Sections 13 and 13A of the Aviation Security Act 1982 are as follows:

13 (1)For purposes to which this Part of this Act applies, the Secretary of State may give a direction in writing to the manager of any aerodrome in the United Kingdom requiring him to use his best endeavours to secure that such searches to which this section applies as are specified in the direction are carried out by constables or by other persons⁴ of a description specified in the direction.

(2) The searches to which this section applies, in relation to an aerodrome, are searches—

1. of the aerodrome or any part of it;
2. of any aircraft which at the time when the direction is given or at any subsequent time is in any part of the aerodrome; and
3. of persons or property (other than aircraft) which may at any such time be in any part of the aerodrome.

(3) Without prejudice to section 7(1) of this Act,⁵ where a direction given under this section to the manager of an aerodrome is for the time being in force, then if a constable, or any other person⁶ specified in the direction in accordance with this section, has reasonable cause to suspect that an article to which section 4 of this Act⁷ applies is in, or may be brought into, any part of the aerodrome, he may, by virtue of this subsection and without a warrant, search any part of the aerodrome or any aircraft, vehicle, goods or other moveable property of any description which, or any person who, is for the time being in any part of the aerodrome, and for that purpose—

1. may enter any building or works in the aerodrome, or enter upon any land in the aerodrome, if need be by force; and
2. may stop any such aircraft, vehicle, goods, property or person and detain him for so long as may be necessary for that purpose.

(4) Any person who—

1. without reasonable excuse fails to comply with a direction given to him under this section; or
2. intentionally obstructs or impedes a person acting in the exercise of a power conferred on him by subsection (3) above,
   shall be guilty of an offence and liable—
   1. on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum;
   2. on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both.

13A(1) For purposes to which this Part of this Act applies, the Secretary of State may give a direction to any person (other than the manager of an aerodrome) who—

1. occupies any land forming part of an aerodrome in the United Kingdom; or
2. is permitted to have access to a restricted zone of such an aerodrome for the purposes of the activities of a business carried on by him, requiring him to use his best endeavours to secure that such searches to which this section applies as are specified in the direction are carried out by constables or by other persons⁸ of a description specified in the direction.

(2) The searches to which this section applies are—

1. in relation to a person falling within subsection (1)(a) above, searches—
   1. of the land which he occupies within the aerodrome, and
   2. of persons or property which may at any time be on that land, and
2. in relation to a person falling within subsection (1)(b) above, searches—
   1. of any land which he occupies outside the aerodrome for the purposes of his business, and
   2. of persons or property which may at any time be on that land.

(3) Any person who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with a direction given to him under this section shall be guilty of an offence and liable—

1. on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum;
2. on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment not exceeding two years, or to both.

(4) Where a person is convicted of an offence under subsection (3) above, then, if without reasonable excuse the failure in respect of which he was convicted is continued after the conviction, he shall be guilty of a further offence and liable on summary conviction to a fine not exceeding one-tenth of level 5 on the standard scale for each day on which the failure continues.

Most recently, s 84 of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 has enhanced the powers of the police and civilians under the amended ss 21C and 21D of the Aviation Security Act 1982. This will enable a constable, the manager of an aerodrome, or a person acting on his behalf, to use reasonable force to remove a person whose presence in a restricted zone or aircraft is unauthorised.

Despite what appears to be a comprehensive range of powers available to civilian security officers in airports, a number of gaps seem evident. For instance, no power of arrest is attached to the offences of intentionally obstructing or impeding such officers. Neither of them are arrestable offences under s 24 and Sched 1A of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984 (see Appendix 1 for the range of these offences) and, as they are not police officers, the general arrest conditions under s 25 of PACE are not available. These are powers available only to the police, which enable them to arrest persons under a number of conditions that are listed in Appendix 2. There is also only limited scope in using the common law power to arrest in order to deal with a breach of the peace. In any event, the arrest must be for an actual or apprehended breach of the peace and not for intentionally obstructing or impeding the officers in question. If a consequence of the obstruction involves an assault, occasioning actual bodily harm (or more serious injury) or criminal damage to the officer’s uniform or other property, for instance, these could amount to arrestable offences.

Section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 states that a person may use reasonable force to prevent crime, effect or assist in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders, or persons unlawfully at large. If there is no arrest power to begin with, persons cannot be lawfully arrested. In other words, s 3(1) does not confer a blanket power of arrest for every transgression against the criminal law. However, it is submitted that it may be used in a situation where, for example, a security officer is assaulted and the assailant makes, or is likely to make, a further attack on the officer or someone else. Reasonable force may then be used to prevent this crime, the offence being another assault, or even damage to property. The use of force in this instance could include restraining the person concerned until the police arrive to make the arrest. Before departing from the restrictions on the powers of airport security officers, it should also be noted that no express power of seizure appears to have been conferred upon these security operatives either.

Section 82 of the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001, however, has created three new arrestable offences under s 24 and Sched 1A of PACE. These include two offences related to the power to use reasonable force to remove unauthorised persons from aircraft and prohibited zones, mentioned above, and also a power related to the Civil Aviation Act 1982. These offences are under ss 21C(1) and 21D(1) of the Aviation Security Act 1982 (unauthorised presence in a restricted zone or on an aircraft) and s 39(1) of the Civil Aviation Act 1982 (trespass on an aerodrome). By virtue of these offences being classed as arrestable, it confers the power of a citizen’s arrest on non-police personnel, which can include airport security officers, of course.

Notwithstanding the anomalies mentioned above, the provision of the above powers exercisable by any ‘other person’ means that not only the police but also civilian security officers may be authorised to conduct the wide range of searches empowered under the Aviation Security Act 1982. It should be noted that civilian security operatives are included in other provisions under that Act. For example, the new s 20B enables an ‘authorised person’ to give a ‘detention direction’, preventing certain aircraft which are at risk from flying. Reasonable force may be used to enforce this measure by the authorised person or by another person acting under his authority. It is not surprising, therefore, that a substantial amount of routine airport security is in the hands of private security operatives. This is the first example of specific public protection duties being devolved to the private security sector. It also provides an illustration of statutory powers that are not held by conventional security officers being conferred upon specific private security operatives. This trend has been significantly extended through the relevant provisions under the Criminal Justice Act 1991, the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999, the Channel Tunnel (Security) Order 1994 and the Access to Justice Act 1999. These will, in turn, be discussed in the next six chapters.

1 Emphasis added.

2 Measures were subsequently taken which strengthened the vetting of security staff at airports.

3 Quoted from the article published in The Observer by Draper, H, reproduced in Private Police, 1978, Penguin.

4 Emphasis added.

5 This refers to the power of a constable to prevent a person from travelling on an aircraft who is suspected of intending to commit offences such as hijacking, destroying, damaging or endangering the safety of aircraft, or other acts likely to endanger aircraft safety.

6 Emphasis added.

7 Such articles include firearms (real or imitation), explosives or any offensive weapons.

8 Emphasis added.

CHAPTER 2

MAGISTRATES’ COURT SECURITY OFFICERS

The substitution of the police by civilian security officers in the magistrates’ courts has been very apparent in recent years. The Le Vay Report¹ identified the need for a visible uniformed presence to replace the diminished high police profile that once existed in those courts. The reason for this general reduction in police numbers during magistrates’ court proceedings is largely due to the way in which prosecutions are presented, especially since the 1980s, when the Crown Prosecution Service removed this responsib...

Table of contents

• COVER PAGE
• TITLE PAGE
• COPYRIGHT PAGE
• ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
• AUTHOR’S NOTE
• TABLE OF STATUTES
• TABLE OF OTHER LEGISLATION
• INTRODUCTION
• PART I: THE DEVOLUTION OF PUBLIC PROTECTION DUTIES TO THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY
• PART II: DESIGNATED AND ACCREDITED CIVILIANS UNDER THE POLICE REFORM ACT 2002: THE ‘EXTENDED POLICE FAMILY’
• PART III: REGULATION OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY
• APPENDIX 1: POWERS OF ARREST UNDER SECTIONS 24, 116 AND SCHEDULES 1A AND 5 OF THE POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984
• APPENDIX 2: POLICE POWERS OF ARREST UNDER SECTION 25 OF THE POLICE AND CRIMINAL EVIDENCE ACT 1984
• APPENDIX 3: EXAMPLES OF ‘ANY PERSON’ ARREST POWERS
• APPENDIX 4: THE TEXT OF PART 4, CHAPTER 1 AND SCHEDULES 4 AND 5 OF THE POLICE REFORM ACT 2002
• APPENDIX 5: THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY ACT 2001— A BASIC OVERVIEW OF ITS KEY PROVISIONS
• APPENDIX 6: TEXT OF THE PRIVATE SECURITY INDUSTRY ACT 2001
• APPENDIX 7: MEMBERS OF THE SECURITY INDUSTRY AUTHORITY