T
The420Guy
Guest
Chief constables are refusing to sanction new proposals that reduce
police powers of arrest against cannabis smokers in a rebellion
against the Government.
The hardline approach by members of the Association of Chief Police
Officers (Acpo) is expected to lead to huge differences in how
cannabis is policed in Britain.
It will also cause a schism between regional police forces and the
Metropolitan Police, which intends to back plans by David Blunkett,
the Home Secretary, for officers to arrest cannabis users only in
exceptional circumstances.
Last year, Mr Blunkett announced that he planned to downgrade cannabis
from a class B to a class C drug, effectively allowing it to be smoked
for personal use. He took the decision in part to ensure that police
forces targeted their overstretched resources towards hard drugs.
But the Home Secretary was forced into partial retreat. After fierce
lobbying by senior police officers, he announced new laws enabling
police to retain the power of arrest for cannabis possession as well
as a 14-year sentence for dealers.
These new powers are contained in the Criminal Justice Bill, which is
likely to gain Royal Assent later this year.
Andy Hayman, chairman of Acpo's drugs committee and the Chief
Constable of Norfolk, battled to persuade other chief constables to
accept a three-strikes-and-you're-out policy, but this was rejected on
the grounds that it would be too difficult for officers to monitor
users.
At a meeting of chief constables next month he will attempt to push
through a watered-down strategy proposing arrest in specific
circumstances, for example where users have been found in possession
outside schools. But chief constables of individual forces have argued
they must be allowed to decide when to make arrests.
A police insider said that the different approaches in policing
towards cannabis will send "all sorts of mixed messages" to users.
"Chief constables have said that Parliament or the Government cannot
tell a constable when and why they exercise their discretion. It's a
matter for the officer concerned," the source said.
An Independent on Sunday survey of half of British police forces on
how they treated cannabis users over the last financial year shows
remarkable discrepancies and indicates that the system is in chaos.
The number of people cautioned by Cleveland Police for possessing
class B drugs, for example, increased from 117 in 2001 to 186 in 2002.
This compares with Essex Police where there was a much smaller rise -
from 411 in 2001 to 441 in 2002.
"There is major confusion going on," said Roger Howard, chief
executive of drugs charity Drugscope. "Our advice would be for the
police to let go of this issue and to let the Home Secretary do what
he intended in the first place and not have arrestability."
Pubdate: Sun, 22 Jun 2003
Source: Independent on Sunday (UK)
Copyright: 2003 Independent Newspapers (UK) Ltd.
Contact: letters@independent.co.uk
police powers of arrest against cannabis smokers in a rebellion
against the Government.
The hardline approach by members of the Association of Chief Police
Officers (Acpo) is expected to lead to huge differences in how
cannabis is policed in Britain.
It will also cause a schism between regional police forces and the
Metropolitan Police, which intends to back plans by David Blunkett,
the Home Secretary, for officers to arrest cannabis users only in
exceptional circumstances.
Last year, Mr Blunkett announced that he planned to downgrade cannabis
from a class B to a class C drug, effectively allowing it to be smoked
for personal use. He took the decision in part to ensure that police
forces targeted their overstretched resources towards hard drugs.
But the Home Secretary was forced into partial retreat. After fierce
lobbying by senior police officers, he announced new laws enabling
police to retain the power of arrest for cannabis possession as well
as a 14-year sentence for dealers.
These new powers are contained in the Criminal Justice Bill, which is
likely to gain Royal Assent later this year.
Andy Hayman, chairman of Acpo's drugs committee and the Chief
Constable of Norfolk, battled to persuade other chief constables to
accept a three-strikes-and-you're-out policy, but this was rejected on
the grounds that it would be too difficult for officers to monitor
users.
At a meeting of chief constables next month he will attempt to push
through a watered-down strategy proposing arrest in specific
circumstances, for example where users have been found in possession
outside schools. But chief constables of individual forces have argued
they must be allowed to decide when to make arrests.
A police insider said that the different approaches in policing
towards cannabis will send "all sorts of mixed messages" to users.
"Chief constables have said that Parliament or the Government cannot
tell a constable when and why they exercise their discretion. It's a
matter for the officer concerned," the source said.
An Independent on Sunday survey of half of British police forces on
how they treated cannabis users over the last financial year shows
remarkable discrepancies and indicates that the system is in chaos.
The number of people cautioned by Cleveland Police for possessing
class B drugs, for example, increased from 117 in 2001 to 186 in 2002.
This compares with Essex Police where there was a much smaller rise -
from 411 in 2001 to 441 in 2002.
"There is major confusion going on," said Roger Howard, chief
executive of drugs charity Drugscope. "Our advice would be for the
police to let go of this issue and to let the Home Secretary do what
he intended in the first place and not have arrestability."
Pubdate: Sun, 22 Jun 2003
Source: Independent on Sunday (UK)
Copyright: 2003 Independent Newspapers (UK) Ltd.
Contact: letters@independent.co.uk
