Clause 3 - Drug offence searches: England and Wales
Drugs Bill
4:30 pm
Mrs Cheryl Gillan (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Chesham and Amersham, Conservative)
The clause significantly enhances the powers of the police with regard to dealers who swallow drugs or conceal them in their body cavities. I understand that is an increasingly common practice among dealers, who wrap substances such as crack cocaine in clingfilm and hide them in their mouths, or indeed in other parts of their body that would probably deter the Minister and me from searching for them, but thankfully do not deter the police and others. Subsection (2) ensures that a drugs-only intimate search may only be undertaken where the person concerned has consented. However, once again there seems to be over-qualification. New subsection (3A) provides that
''the appropriate consent has been given in writing''.
That has been grouped with my amendment No. 33.
Will the Minister clarify when consent would not be appropriate? For clarification and future interpretation, what would constitute appropriate consent? Would it be sufficient to sign a form? Is verbal consent sufficient?
My proposal, to insert ''in writing'', would allow a defendant or offender merely to sign a form indicating their consent. It would be a matter of course in the police station or wherever. Adding the words ''in writing'' is a vehicle to ensure that there are no loopholes that would allow the process to be challenged at a latter stage. In (3A), we say that
''A drug offence search shall not be carried out unless the appropriate consent has been given in writing''.
I have taken that clue of ''writing'' and tacked it on to (3B), because, if the consent were given in writing, it would be there for all to see and be less likely to be disputed in court. So why not deliver a copy in writing to the person who is the subject of the search and have him signify his consent in writing? Would that not be a simple and practical solution? I hope that the Minister finds it helpful.