Kurt Sansone
Stop and search powers based 'on reasonable suspicion'
A European Court judgment, ruling that police stop and search powers in the UK were illegal did not "at face value" change the parameters of Maltese law based on reasonable suspicion, the Home Affairs Minister said.
However, the ruling would be evaluated by the Attorney General to determine its impact on Maltese legislation, Justice and Home Affairs Minister Carmelo Mifsud Bonnici said.
In a case instituted by two people against the UK government, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that stop and search provisions under UK anti-terrorism legislation were too wide and interfered with an individual's right to privacy.
Broadly similar provisions exist in Malta, giving the police and the army stop and search powers described by the European Court as heightening the risk of individuals being victims of discrimination because they could be stopped on the basis of a "hunch" or "professional intuition".
Two leading criminal lawyers told The Sunday Times the police and army powers to stop and search people were too broad and gave rise to arbitrariness that could lead to discrimination.
However, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said Maltese legislation made it clear that stop and search powers could only be exercised if the police had reasonable suspicion.
"The ruling attacks the immense powers given to the police in the UK by the anti-terrorism law, which allows searches if it is expedient to do so. In Malta, the basis is one of reasonable suspicion and, so, I cannot see how this sentence, at face value, impinges on our state of affairs. However, I will await the Attorney General's legal advice on the matter," Dr Mifsud Bonnici said.
He defended the notion of police searches and made a distinction between stopping someone to check on the car licence and stopping a car to perform a search for drugs.
"If somebody feels aggrieved by the way he is treated at a road block he has every right under our laws to seek redress," the minister said when asked whether in practice police officers and soldiers based their decisions to search vehicles and people on reasonable suspicion.
The principle of reasonable suspicion, he added, was the one being adopted for the law enabling the police to perform breathalyser tests and the law permitting Customs officers to search vehicles bringing over goods from Sicily.
Last year, the AFM said it carried out 140 road blocks, through which 1,159 vehicles were checked. A total of 67 individuals were detained for a variety of alleged offences.
Recently, the AFM said eight people were held at road blocks over the weekend: five of them were allegedly driving without a licence or valid insurance. However, the army failed to provide any information on how many vehicles were stopped and how many people were searched over the same weekend.
5 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
N.Lawrence
Mar 22nd 2010, 21:11
The fact that so many drivers are caught out with no license and/or insurance totally justifies random stop and check.
It wouldn't bother ME at all to be stopped, knowing that these inspections keep the petty criminals in check.
C.Formosa
Mar 22nd 2010, 15:46
If you have nothing to hide then being stopped at a roadblock should'nt bother you. I work late shifts and have regularly encounterd roadblocks especially at weekends. The police/army were always courteous and this never delayed my journey by more than a couple of minutes. As far as i am concerned such roadblocks deter drunk driving, carriage of illegal weapons and drugs, and should be carried out more frequently. Also more traffic police patrols should be on the road to discourage stupid driving.
Ian Fenech
Mar 22nd 2010, 14:23
"If somebody feels aggrieved by the way he is treated at a road block he has every right under our laws to seek redress," Hahaha yeah right, and when you speak out you get charged with obstruction of justice......... Mickey Mouse country
Darren J. Galea
Mar 22nd 2010, 11:45
This statement is nonsensical. The hackneyed phrase "reasonable suspicion" ought to be replaced with "pot luck persecution" and this amounts to making us look like a police state. The Hon. Minister should be brave enough to give us the actual figures so we can see how many were stopped and how many successful prosecutions resulted so we can work out the arrest ratio. Its obvious that this is an easier option to the authorities that actually investigating the big fish, who get away with supplying drugs due to their inaction. Hello? Arresting occasional users does not curb the problem, prosecuting suppliers does.
Ramon Casha
Mar 22nd 2010, 10:45
"However, Dr Mifsud Bonnici said Maltese legislation made it clear that stop and search powers could only be exercised if the police had reasonable suspicion."
In that case it is clear that the police and armed forces are not operating within the law... unless, of course, being young is a reasonable suspicion in itself. It's fairly obvious that these spot checks are conducted at times and places where many young people are travelling, and also that if a car's occupants are young, they are far more likely to be detained for a search than, say, a married couple.
Now I'm not denying that young people are statistically more likely to be in possession of drugs, but this policy means that any young people who have to travel regularly at certain times or places will be subjected to an inordinate number of searches, which can cause them to be regularly late for work or other inconveniences.
And let's not forget that, in the UK, they are ostensibly doing it to combat terrorism. In Malta they do it to ensure nobody smokes a joint.