Abstract
Compares the European Court of Human Rights judgments in Gillan v United Kingdom (4158/05) and Colon v Netherlands (49458/06) which both considered whether police searches conducted in authorised areas for articles connected with terrorist attacks or violent crime, but without specific suspicions against the persons being searched, breached the European Convention on Human Rights 1950 art.8 or were prescribed by law. Considers the implications of the Colon ruling for the validity of the suspicionless stop and search power provided by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 s.60.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 978-982 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Criminal Law Review - London |
| Volume | 2013 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- police powers and duties
- stop and search
- terrorism
- right to respect for private and family life
- prescribed by law
- suspicion
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Suspicionless stop and search: lessons from the Netherlands'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver