The Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Bill threatens more than our civil liberties
How the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill threatens more than our civil liberties
by Holly Barrow
When the Metropolitan police violently shut down a vigil for Sarah Everard last month, attention was drawn to the new Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill due to pass its second hearing in the House of Commons just days later. As people became aware that the new Bill would significantly expand police powers and diminish the right to protest, it began to receive mounting backlash. Since then, demonstrations across the country to ‘Kill the Bill’ have remained focused on how the Police Bill would intervene on the right to protest, diminishing our civil liberties.
While this is undoubtedly of critical concern, there are other aspects of the Bill which are receiving far less public attention but pose equally as dangerous threats. The Police Bill would not only serve an attack on the right to protest, it would similarly allow for drastic expansions to the criminal justice system.
Key legislation under the Bill includes measures to ‘prevent and reduce serious violence’ by increasing maximum prison sentences for certain crimes, bringing an end to the automatic early release of those considered a danger to the public, enhancing stop and search powers by making it easier for police officers to search those suspected of carrying a blade, and including minimum three year custodial sentences for ‘third strike’ burglars. Ministers have claimed such ‘tough’ legislation will protect our communities however many scholars and activists would beg to differ.
Take the Bill’s proposed increase to stop and search powers, for example. There is copious evidence to suggest that UK police use stop and search powers discriminately, disproportionately targeting Black, Asian and minority ethnic communities - even more so throughout the pandemic. Since March 2020, the Coronavirus Act has granted police a number of ‘temporary’ powers to enforce lockdown measures. The result has seen young Black and Asian men in particular hit with excessive fines and targeted under stop and search powers at four times the rate of white people. The Coronavirus Act 2020 provides a glimpse of what the Bill would entail.
And it is not only enhanced stop and search powers that would have dire consequences for marginalised communities. The criminal justice system as a whole overwhelmingly targets people from marginalised groups; such sweeping powers and harsher sentencing will only exacerbate current inequalities across the UK’s prison system. The charity Women in Prison reported that 79% of women who uses their services have experienced domestic violence and/or sexual abuse. Over a quarter of the prison population are from a minority ethnic group, despite making up just 10% of the overall population. Assessment on entry to prison in 2015–16 found that 29% of prisoners were identified as having a learning disability or difficulty. And perhaps one of the most devastating statistics: more than half of prisoners in England and Wales were abused as children.
When we look at some of the powers which would be granted under the Bill - such as the introduction of minimum three year custodial sentences for ‘third strike’ burglars - it becomes clear to see who is being targeted. To paraphrase an LSE report: when economic inequality is high and opportunities are low, disadvantaged individuals have an increased incentive to commit certain crimes, such as robbery, burglary and theft. Despite this, harsher criminal justice laws are often enforced disproportionately against economically disadvantaged groups - instead of tackling the issues at the root of such crimes, namely poverty, the government chooses to criminalise.
What’s more, increasing maximum sentences and preventing the automatic early release of those considered a danger to the public might sound appealing to some; it attempts to reassure the public that the government is ‘cracking down’ on crime and will rid our streets of offenders. In reality, England and Wales already have one of the highest rates of incarceration in Western Europe and lengthening sentences has historically failed to deter both violent and non-violent crime.
The Prison Reform Trust published a report just last year which looked at the rapidly rising rate of people serving life sentences in England and Wales, noting that, despite such harsh sentencing, there is no evidence to suggest that this has had any impact on the nature or severity of crimes being committed. Instead, the ever growing prisoner population simply contributes to issues associated with overcrowding, most crucially undermining rehabilitation. So who do these punitive policies serve? Do increased police powers and tougher sentencing protect communities as they claim to, or do they only further exacerbate social inequalities and uphold a dangerous prison industrial complex?
In the UK, the overlapping interests between government and private companies are stark. Million-pound contracts have been established with private firms such as Serco, G4S and Carillion: these companies are openly profiting from incarceration. From technological surveillance to prison catering services, prisons have become generators of wealth. Fourteen UK prisons are now run by private contractors - they are reported to have profit margins of around 8-10%. Perhaps this explains the government’s incentive to expand the criminal justice system and to keep those imprisoned behind bars for as long as possible, despite experts repeatedly stating that this does not reduce crime rates.
In the US, recent developments in Baltimore reinforce how illogical our notions of justice truly are. When the pandemic hit, Baltimore’s State Attorney revealed the city would no longer prosecute minor crimes - including possession of drugs, prostitution, minor traffic violations and other low-level offences - in an attempt to prevent overcrowding prisons during the health crisis. Since then, crime has plummeted across the city - including violent crime. This is not as a result of the pandemic either: other big US cities reported violent crime and homicides spiralling in 2020. Violent crime in Baltimore, however, dropped by 20% compared with the same time last year. There is often a misconception that punitive policies are necessary to protect society - that this is the only solution to crime. Baltimore’s current situation suggests otherwise.
Instead of viewing justice through a lens of punishment, an abolitionist stance urges us to view those who commit crimes as the human beings that they are; people who are often themselves victims of an unequal society. The powers proposed within the Bill are dangerous to marginalised groups and will only serve to build on the UK’s prison industrial complex; they will do little to solve the core of many social issues. When we fight to Kill the Bill, we mustn't only consider the implications it will have on our civil liberties. We should reject it in its entirety as another cog in the UK’s prison complex.
Holly Barrow is a writer for the IAS; an organisation of UK & Ireland based immigration lawyers providing legal assistance with UK visas, citizenship and settlement