It’s back. The government is once again attempting to give the police powers to search homes without a warrant. Buried within the mammoth Crime and Policing Bill that is currently making its way through parliament are a couple of clauses that give the police warrantless powers of entry to search and seize stolen goods.
Ministers and MPs are clearly desperate to be seen to be doing something about the rampant theft of easily traceable phones, bikes and other possessions, especially across the capital. But while one might see the appeal of the Old Bill being given the green light to kick down doors at will to rescue stolen phones, we should recognise that doing so has serious consequences for personal liberty and privacy.
If all of this feels slightly familiar, it might be because it is
The problem is that this type of legislation is anarcho-tyrannical – it is unlikely to deter criminals yet manages to place greater burdens on the law abiding. The clauses address some of the consequences of what seems to be the police’s inability to combat theft and various forms of street crime – but fails to deal with the root causes. God forbid you might open Google Maps on Oxford Street without becoming a prime target for phone-snatchers, but rather than arrest, jail and even deport these bandits when necessary, the government is going after legal safeguards on private property.
Once the police can enter your home this way to search for stolen goods, the likelihood of them being able to do so for other offences increases. While the Home Office has tried to limit the new legislation to cover only ‘electronically tracked stolen goods’, this will still allow any item whose location is ‘determined by electronic means’ to fall into scope. Though there is some debate about whether ‘intangible goods’ fall into the definition, the possibility of the rozzers kicking down the doors of licence fee dodgers remains not zero.
The Bill will also allow the police to seize anything they suspect to be stolen in a property they’ve accessed, which gives these powers an expansive remit. Whether the constabulary starts using this pretence as a general way to gain easier access to private property is a matter, I suspect, which will be subject to much legal and political wrangling in years to come. Remember that this can still be avoided.
Empowering the police to enter homes without a warrant is an immense expansion of state power at the expense of individual liberty. For almost 200 years, England’s police have imperfectly balanced the maintenance of law and order with their obligations to a free society. Entering private premises without a warrant is far more in the remit of the Stasi than the humble bobby.
Unsurprisingly, these powers are enthusiastically supported by the College of Policing, who told MPs last year that they were preparing appropriate guidance for police officers. This is the same College of Policing that dreamt up non-crime hate incidents, the ‘non-crimes’ being any act a victim believes to be motivated by hostility or prejudice but which is not a criminal offence. At least in Allison Pearson’s case, the police officers had the courtesy to knock on her door. How long before they are allowed to kick it in for this type of ‘crime’?
If all of this feels slightly familiar, it might be because it is. Last spring, I warned that the previous Conservative government had included a similar clause in its similarly titled Criminal Justice Bill that would have given the police similar warrantless powers of entry.
I can only assume that Rishi Sunak concurred with my analysis and decided that the surest way to rectify this mistaken policy was by calling and then decisively losing a general election, ensuring the death of the Criminal Justice Bill and all its provisions. And while I am grateful to our former Prime Minister for doing so, this proposal has returned to darken England’s door.
What remains baffling is the idea that a warrant in someway constitutes a hindrance to be overcome. Ministers should focus on improving the courts’ ability to approve warrants in a timely manner. The public is right to be frustrated at the police’s inability to deal with rising cases of theft. But last November, London’s Met Police, for example, arrested a gang of four and recovered 170 phones. Meanwhile, in early February 230 criminals were arrested for phone snatching, and 1,000 devices seized, during a week-long crackdown. This is highly commendable. It also shows that the police already have the powers necessary to tackle this type of crime.
Once again, the government is taking a sledgehammer to civil liberties to get tough on crime when we know that the solutions to our policing crisis hinge on willpower and action. I can only hope Keir Starmer is open to taking inspiration from his predecessor.
Comments