Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
2005 No. 1522 OPEN SPACES, ENGLAND and WALES the Royal
STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 2005 No. 1522 OPEN SPACES, ENGLAND AND WALES The Royal Parks (Regulation of Specified Parks) Order 2005 Made - - - - 6th June 2005 Laid before Parliament 8th June 2005 Coming into force - - 1st July 2005 The Secretary of State, in exercise of the powers conferred upon her by section 162(4) of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005(a), hereby makes the following Order: Citation and commencement 1. This Order may be cited as the Royal Parks (Regulation of Specified Parks) Order 2005 and shall come into force on 1st July 2005. Specified parks 2. The following parks, gardens, recreation grounds, open spaces or other land in the metropolitan police district are hereby specified for the purposes of section 162 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (Regulation of specified parks): Abingdon Street Garden, being the garden constructed on the sites of properties formerly known as 17-28 (both inclusive) Abingdon Street, London, SW1, the garden surrounding the adjoining Jewel Tower, and the lawn surrounding the King George V Memorial; Brompton Cemetery; Bushy Park; The Longford River and those parts of its banks which are for the time being under the control or management of the Secretary of State; Those parts of Greenwich Park which are for the time being under the control or management of the Secretary of State; Grosvenor Square Garden; Hampton Court Gardens; Hampton Court Green; Hampton Court Park; The Barge Walk (Hampton Court), being the whole of the riverside land under the control or management of the Secretary of State between Kingston and Hampton Court Bridges between the River Thames and the outer walls, gates, railings or fences of Hampton Court Park and Hampton Court Gardens; (a) 2005 c. -
Royal Navy Police
Royal Navy Police An inspection of the leadership of the Royal Navy Police in relation to its investigations July 2016 © HMIC 2016 ISBN: 978-1-78655-157-3 www.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/hmic Contents Summary .................................................................................................................... 3 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................ 7 2. How effective is the overall strategic leadership and direction of the RNP, including the structures and mechanisms in support of these areas? .............. 10 What we were looking for ..................................................................................... 10 Findings ................................................................................................................ 10 3. How effective are the oversight, governance, monitoring and assessment arrangements within the RNP to ensure investigations are effective and kept free from improper interference? ........................................................................... 24 What we were looking for ..................................................................................... 24 Findings ................................................................................................................ 25 4. How well does the RNP use the National Intelligence Model in identifying strategic policing priorities that influence strategic planning and resourcing? 31 What we were looking for .................................................................................... -
The Magistrates' Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981
Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to The Magistrates' Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS 1981 No. 1675 (N.I. 26) The Magistrates' Courts (Northern Ireland) Order 1981 - - - - - - 24th November 1981 Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Order applied (1.1.2012) by The Trade in Animals and Related Products Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2011 (S.R. 2011/438), reg. 24(1) C2 Order: power to modify conferred (6.6.2012) by Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011 (c. 24), ss. 67(5) (a), 111(3) (with Sch. 6 para. 7); S.R. 2012/214, art. 2(m) C3 Order applied in Part with modifications (7.6.2012) by The Penalty Notices (Justice Act (Northern Ireland) 2011) (Enforcement of Fines) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2012 (S.R. 2012/188), reg. 8 C4 Order applied (1.4.2013) by The Welfare of Animals (Dog Breeding Establishments and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2013 (S.R. 2013/43), reg. 14(5) C5 Order applied (1.10.2013) by The Veterinary Medicines Regulations 2013 (S.I. 2013/2033), reg. 45(5) (with reg. 3) C6 Order applied (1.3.2014) by The Olive Oil (Marketing Standards) Regulations 2014 (S.I. 2014/195), reg. 10(3) C7 Order applied (17.4.2006) by Environmental Impact Assessment (Uncultivated Land and Semi-Natural Areas) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 (S.R. -
Reconciling Ireland's Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values
Reconciling Ireland's Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values Kate Doran Thesis Offered for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy School of Law Faculty of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences University of Limerick Supervisor: Prof. Paul McCutcheon Submitted to the University of Limerick, November 2014 Abstract Title: Reconciling Ireland’s Bail Laws with Traditional Irish Constitutional Values Author: Kate Doran Bail is a device which provides for the pre-trial release of a criminal defendant after security has been taken for the defendant’s future appearance at trial. Ireland has traditionally adopted a liberal approach to bail. For example, in The People (Attorney General) v O’Callaghan (1966), the Supreme Court declared that the sole purpose of bail was to secure the attendance of the accused at trial and that the refusal of bail on preventative detention grounds amounted to a denial of the presumption of innocence. Accordingly, it would be unconstitutional to deny bail to an accused person as a means of preventing him from committing further offences while awaiting trial. This purist approach to the right to bail came under severe pressure in the mid-1990s from police, prosecutorial and political forces which, in turn, was a response to a media generated panic over the perceived increase over the threat posed by organised crime and an associated growth in ‘bail banditry’. A constitutional amendment effectively neutralising the effects of the O'Callaghan jurisprudence was adopted in 1996. This was swiftly followed by the Bail Act 1997 which introduced the concept of preventative detention (in the bail context) into Irish law. -
St 9617 2004 Dcl 1
Council of the European Union Brussels, 30 November 2020 (OR. en) 9617/04 DCL 1 LIMITE SCH-EVAL 33 COMIX 344 DECLASSIFICATION of document: 9617/04 RESTREINT UE dated: 17 May 2004 new status: LIMITE Subject: Questionnaire – Questions to UK on data protection arrangements relating to the UK’s national implementation of the Schengen Information System. - Answers from the UK Delegations will find attached the declassified version of the above document. The text of this document is identical to the previous version. 9617/04 DCL 1 KAL SMART 2.C.S1 LIMITE EN RESTREINT UE COUNCIL OF Brussels, 17 May 2004 THE EUROPEAN UNION 9617/04 RESTREINT UE SCH-EVAL 33 COMIX 344 NOTE from : UK delegation to : Schengen Evaluation Working Party No. prev. doc. : 9227/04 SCH-EVAL 25 COMIX 308 + ADD 1 Subject : Questionnaire – Questions to UK on data protection arrangements relating to the UK’s national implementation of the Schengen Information System. - Answers from the UK The United Kingdom has asked the Schengen Evaluation Group to undertake an evaluation of the data protection arrangements which it has in place to support the introduction of the Schengen Information System to the UK. As the UK’s technical solution to the SIS has not yet been finalised, the questions relate only to data protection arrangements. Questions relating to the management and handling of the data will be answered in the context of the full SIS evaluation which will take place once the UK’s national solution has been fully implemented. 1. Provide the list of services with access to SIS data See Annex A and Annex B 9617/04 WvdR/kve 1 DG H RESTREINT UE EN RESTREINT UE 2. -
A Review of the United Kingdom's
A REVIEW OF THE UNITED KINGDOM’S EXTRADITION ARRANGEMENTS (Following Written Ministerial Statement by the Secretary of State for the Home Department of 8 September 2010) Presented to the Home Secretary on 30 September 2011 This report is also available online at http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/ ~ 2 ~ The Rt Hon Sir Scott Baker was called to the Bar in 1961, and practised in a range of legal areas, including criminal law and professional negligence. He became a Recorder in 1976 and was appointed as a High Court judge in 1988. In 1999, he presided over the trial of Great Western Trains following the Southall rail crash in 1997 and in the same year was the judge who tried Jonathan Aitken. He was the lead judge of the Administrative Court between 2000 and 2002 when he was appointed a Lord Justice of Appeal, presiding over the inquests into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed. He also sat regularly in the Divisional Court hearing appeals and judicial reviews in extradition cases. He retired in 2010 and is currently a Surveillance Commissioner, a member of the Bermuda Court of Appeal and a member of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. David Perry QC is a barrister and joint head of chambers at 6 King’s Bench Walk, Temple. From 1991 to 1997, Mr Perry was one of the Standing Counsel to the Department of Trade and Industry. From 1997 to 2001, he was Junior Treasury Counsel to the Crown at the Central Criminal Court and Senior Treasury Counsel from 2001 until 2006, when he took silk. -
Criminal Law Act 1977
Changes to legislation: There are outstanding changes not yet made by the legislation.gov.uk editorial team to Criminal Law Act 1977. Any changes that have already been made by the team appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) Criminal Law Act 1977 1977 CHAPTER 45 An Act to amend the law of England and Wales with respect to criminal conspiracy; to make new provision in that law, in place of the provisions of the common law and the Statutes of Forcible Entry, for restricting the use or threat of violence for securing entry into any premises and for penalising unauthorised entry or remaining on premises in certain circumstances; otherwise to amend the criminal law, including the law with respect to the administration of criminal justice; to provide for the alteration of certain pecuniary and other limits; to amend section 9(4) of the Administration of Justice Act 1973, the Legal Aid Act 1974, the Rabies Act 1974 and the Diseases of Animals (Northern Ireland) Order 1975 and the law about juries and coroners’ inquests; and for connected purposes. [29th July 1977] Annotations: Editorial Information X1 The text of ss. 1–5, 14–49, 57, 58, 60–65, Schs. 1–9, 11–14 was taken from S.I.F. Group 39:1 (Criminal Law: General), ss. 51, 63(2), 65(1)(3)(7)(10) from S.I.F. Group 39:2 ( Criminal Law: Public Safety and Order), ss. 53, 54, 65(1)(3)(7)(9)(10) Group 39:5 (Criminal Law: Sexual Offences and Obscenity), ss. -
Fourteenth Report: Draft Statute Law Repeals Bill
The Law Commission and The Scottish Law Commission (LAW COM. No. 211) (SCOT. LAW COM. No. 140) STATUTE LAW REVISION: FOURTEENTH REPORT DRAFT STATUTE LAW (REPEALS) BILL Presented to Parliament by the Lord High Chancellor and the Lord Advocate by Command of Her Majesty April 1993 LONDON: HMSO E17.85 net Cm 2176 The Law Commission and the Scottish Law Commission were set up by the Law Commissions Act 1965 for the purpose of promoting the reform of the Law. The Law Commissioners are- The Honourable Mr. Justice Brooke, Chairman Mr Trevor M. Aldridge, Q.C. Mr Jack Beatson Mr Richard Buxton, Q.C. Professor Brenda Hoggett, Q.C. The Secretary of the Law Commission is Mr Michael Collon. Its offices are at Conquest House, 37-38 John Street, Theobalds Road, London WClN 2BQ. The Scottish Law Commissioners are- The Honourable Lord Davidson, Chairman .. Dr E.M. Clive Professor P.N. Love, C.B.E. Sheriff I.D.Macphail, Q.C. Mr W.A. Nimmo Smith, Q.C. The Secretary of the Scottish Law Commission is Mr K.F. Barclay. Its offices are at 140 Causewayside, Edinburgh EH9 1PR. .. 11 THE LAW COMMISSION AND THE SCOTTISH LAW COMMISSION STATUTE LAW REVISION: FOURTEENTH REPORT Draft Statute Law (Repeals) Bill To the Right Honourable the Lord Mackay of Clashfern, Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain, and the Right Honourable the Lord Rodger of Earlsferry, Q.C., Her Majesty's Advocate. In pursuance of section 3(l)(d) of the Law Commissions Act 1965, we have prepared the draft Bill which is Appendix 1 and recommend that effect be given to the proposals contained in it. -
Assessing the Value of Mounted Police Units in the UK
Making and Breaking Barriers Assessing the value of mounted police units in the UK Chris Giacomantonio, Ben Bradford, Matthew Davies and Richard Martin For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/rr830 While the use of mounted police (i.e. police horses and riders) can be traced back to before the advent of the modern police service in 1829, very little is known about the actual work of mounted police from either academic or practitioner standpoints. Police horses are thought to have unique operational and symbolic value, particularly in public order policing (making barriers) and community engagement (breaking barriers) Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., and Cambridge, UK deployments. They may represent a calming presence or, and potentially at the same time, an imposing threat of force. Yet, the relationship between the use of police horses and broader notions of policing by consent in the UK is presently unknown, and all R® is a registered trademark. evidence for these claims is anecdotal at best. In recent years, mounted units have come under resource scrutiny in the UK due to austerity measures. Some forces have eliminated their mounted capacities altogether, while others have developed collaborative or mutual assistance arrangements with © Copyright 2015 RAND Corporation and University of Oxford neighbouring forces. The relative costs and benefits of the available options – maintaining units, merging and centralising mounted resources or eliminating them in whole or part – cannot at present be assessed confidently by individual forces or by national coordinating agencies such as the Home Office, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC). -
Committee of Ministers Secretariat Du Comite Des Ministres
SECRETARIAT GENERAL SECRETARIAT OF THE COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS SECRETARIAT DU COMITE DES MINISTRES Contact: Clare Ovey Tel: 03 88 41 36 45 Date: 21/03/2016 DH-DD(2016)316 Documents distributed at the request of a Representative shall be under the sole responsibility of the said Representative, without prejudice to the legal or political position of the Committee of Ministers. Meeting: 1259 meeting (7-9 June 2016) (DH) Item reference: Updated action plan (04/03/2016) Communication from the United Kingdom concerning the case of Al Skeini against the United Kingdom (Application No. 55721/07) * * * * * * * * * * * Les documents distribués à la demande d’un/e Représentant/e le sont sous la seule responsabilité dudit/de ladite Représentant/e, sans préjuger de la position juridique ou politique du Comité des Ministres. Réunion : 1259 réunion (7-9 juin 2016) (DH) Référence du point : Plan d’action mis à jour Communication du Royaume-Uni concernant l’affaire Al Skeini contre Royaume-Uni (Requête n° 55721/07) (anglais uniquement) Execution of Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights ACTION PLAN AL SKEINI AND OTHERS V THE UNITED KINGDOM Application number 55721/07 Judgment final on 07/07/2011 Information submitted by the United Kingdom Government on 04/03/2016 CASE SUMMARY The case involved six applicants whose relatives were killed in the course of operations conducted by UK Armed Forces in Basra, South East Iraq in the latter part of 2003, when the UK and US were occupying powers after major warfighting had been declared to be complete. The European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) found that all six deaths fell within the jurisdiction of the UK under Article 1 of the Convention because of the exceptional circumstances deriving from the UK’s assumption of authority and responsibility for security in South East Iraq, as an occupying power from 1 May 2003 to 28 June 2004. -
Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 Is up to Date with All Changes Known to Be in Force on Or Before 08 September 2021
Changes to legislation: Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 is up to date with all changes known to be in force on or before 08 September 2021. There are changes that may be brought into force at a future date. Changes that have been made appear in the content and are referenced with annotations. (See end of Document for details) View outstanding changes Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 2001 CHAPTER 16 An Act to make provision for combatting crime and disorder; to make provision about the disclosure of information relating to criminal matters and about powers of search and seizure; to amend the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, the Police and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989 and the Terrorism Act 2000; to make provision about the police, the National Criminal Intelligence Service and the National Crime Squad; to make provision about the powers of the courts in relation to criminal matters; and for connected purposes. [11th May 2001] Be it enacted by the Queen’s most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:— PART 1 PROVISIONS FOR COMBATTING CRIME AND DISORDER CHAPTER 1 ON THE SPOT PENALTIES FOR DISORDERLY BEHAVIOUR Modifications etc. (not altering text) C1 Pt. 1 Ch. 1 extended (15.11.2003) by Police Reform Act 2002 (c. 30), ss. 38, 108, Sch. 4 para. 1(2)(a); S.I. 2003/2593, art. 2(d) C2 Pt. 1 Ch. 1 modified (26.12.2004) by The Penalties for Disorderly Behaviour (Amendment of Minimum Age) Order 2004 (S.I. -
Arrangement of Sections
Criminal Law Act 1967 CHAPTER 58 ARRANGEMENT OF SECTIONS PART I FELONY AND MISDEMEANOUR Section 1. Abolition of distinction between felony and misdemeanour. 2. Arrest without warrant. 3. Use of force in making arrest, etc. 4. Penalties for assisting offenders. 5. Penalties for concealing offences or giving false information. 6. Trial of offences. 7. Powers of dealing with offenders. 8. Jurisdiction of quarter sessions. 9. Pardon. 10. Amendments of particular enactments, and repeals. 11. Extent of Part I, and provision for Northern Ireland. 12. Commencement, savings, and other general provisions. PART 11 OBSOLETE CRIMES 13. Abolition of certain offences, and consequential repeals. PART III SUPPLEMENTARY 14. Civil rights in respect of maintenance and champerty. 15. Short title. SCHEDULES: Schedule 1-Lists of offences falling, or not falling, within jurisdiction of quarter sessions. Schedule 2-Supplementary amendments. Schedule 3-Repeals (general). Schedule 4--Repeals (obsolete crimes). A Criminal Law Act 1967 CH. 58 1 ELIZABETH n , 1967 CHAPTER 58 An Act to amend the law of England and Wales by abolishing the division of crimes into felonies and misdemeanours and to amend and simplify the law in respect of matters arising from or related to that division or the abolition of it; to do away (within or without England and Wales) with certain obsolete crimes together with the torts of maintenance and champerty; and for purposes connected therewith. [21st July 1967] E IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and BTemporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:- PART I FELONY AND MISDEMEANOUR 1.-(1) All distinctions between felony and misdemeanour are J\b<?liti?n of hereby abolished.