On the noble Lord’s final point, there is some time between now and the final stages of the Bill—after Easter—and I shall do my best to ensure that that happens. We cannot have a mature consideration on Report unless we get as much of the guidance available to noble Lords as possible.
We have certainly considered the Article 5 compatibility of the power, but the amendment would affect the operational effectiveness of the police and Armed Forces. It would simply limit the powers in paragraph 3 of Schedule 3, which seeks to ensure that searches for munitions and transmitters are not disputed by limiting their duration to two hours, extendable to four. The power currently sits at four hours, extendable to an absolute maximum of eight. Where the authority of a senior officer or member of the Armed Forces has been sought, they must reasonably believe that the extension is necessary to carry out the search or ensure that it is not frustrated.
I shall be reasonably brief, but I first provide some background on the use of the power. It is intended to ensure that important searches are not disrupted. Police officers may face people standing in their way, running around the house, moving objectives and inviting everyone from the neighbourhood in for a cup of tea. That is a perfectly civilised thing to do, but it would completely frustrate the objectives of a search. It could mean that a gun remains in the hands of criminals or terrorists.
Both the police and the Armed Forces seek to ensure that powers are used in a proportionate way. They do not walk into a house and simply impose the measures. Where they are not necessary, they do not use them. I do not think that I would be contradicted if I said that the Police Service of Northern Ireland is already one of the most human rights-aware police forces in the world because of its experience over the past 30 to 40 years. But both the police and the Armed Forces will be providing additional guidance to their officers and soldiers to reinforce the proportionate and limited manner in which this power must be used. I will share that guidance with the House.
Accepting the amendments would mean that the complex and detailed searches of houses that may need to be carried out could not be done without disruption. We have worked closely with the police and Armed Forces to ensure that the four-hour limit, extendable where absolutely necessary to eight, is the minimum length of time necessary. We are not seeking a longer period than is necessary. The exercise of the powers would amount to a restriction of movement rather than the deprivation of liberty in most instances. As was said on a previous amendment, if the use of a power did engage Article 5, it would be compliant with the European Convention on Human Rights because the use of the power is necessary to secure fulfilment of an obligation prescribed by law. In paragraph 8 of Schedule 3, there is an offence of obstructing or frustrating a search under the powers in the schedule. Therefore, there is an obligation to comply with police or Army orders to co-operate and not to frustrate a search. We will obviously return to this matter at Report and I will make sure that we have the guidance well in advance of the debate so that proper consideration can be given.
Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Rooker
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 March 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Justice and Security (Northern Ireland) Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
690 c228-9GC Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:46:06 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386842
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386842
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_386842