Evaluation of article 5

Terrorism Prevention Investigation Measures (TPIM) - Fair

• Balance of interests

• Protection against terror needed but those under investigation have not been charged with anything so they can’t be too harsh SSHD v JJ

• Protections - only lasts a year, has to be reviewed by a judge regularly and cannot infringe on liberty too much by still allowing for meetings and travel

PACE section 60 - Fair

• Allows police to search all people in a certain area

• Quite a large infringement but is limited only to public safety at times of disorder

• This is effectively balanced as it has safeguards on the time and place it is used and has to be approved from high up in the police hierarchy

Kettling - Not Fair

Austin v MPC. This is a public order measure but it is used more liberally and those kettled that weren’t protesting suffer from being in the wrong place at the wrong time. No legislation details the rules for kettling. Bystanders trapped aren’t compensated in favour of police powers.

Mental Health/ Vulnerable persons

Wintwerp v Netherlands - Those people unable to care for themselves can be sectioned but if they feel they aren’t meant to be there it can be issue. It is not clearly defined line but P v Cheshire council set the ‘acid test’ that led to the establishment of DoLS making it more effective.