Maoraigh wrote:
Reminder again that the UK has two separate legal systems in the two Kingdoms which are united..
Three, really – Northern Irish law is different to English/Welsh law and Scots law and is in a different jurisdiction (although NI law is, I think, much more similar to English law than Scots is to English).
Sure; to an extent. But neither is likely to shoot you at an airport.
Reminder again that the UK has two separate legal systems in the two Kingdoms which are united..
All true, but there are a lot of ‘ifs’ in there which make the difference – “if they are entitled to ask you to leave an area” – the point being that generally they’re not entitled to ask you to leave an area at their own discretion ‘just because’ – there needs to be something in place to enable that, at that particular location at that particular time.
Vehicle stopping powers – yes – they are quite wide-ranging but they stem from their powers over the use of vehicles on public roads rather than general powers over the public. They are in essence stopping the vehicle, not the individual driving it. They can ask for papers to ensure the law with respect to the vehicle is being complied with (license, insurance etc) but they don’t have a right to know where you’re going or what you’re doing. They may ask you these questions, and indeed often do, but it is not an offence to refuse to answer.
I have very mixed views on the development of police powers. One thing I definitely don’t like is that the police themselves petition government for extra powers and are often granted them. That is a warning sign for me – it is the role of the police to carry out their jobs as defined by those who employ them (ultimately the taxpayer by way of the government), not to become involved in defining what that job should be or what tools / powers they should be given.
I find draconian powers to prevent peaceful protest very troubling, but at the same time I’m not in favour of people gluing themselves to the M25 and generally feel that something (preferably a less blunt tool than being run over by a truck) should prevent this.
Finally, I have little problem with the police harassing known criminals. The Guardian often carries outrage stories about person XYZ (usually in London) who has apparently had their rights infringed by the Police on some particular occasion. Reading the article in full often reveals that the person has quite the track record, and at that point my sympathy tends to evaporate.
Airborne_Again wrote:
I would be surprised if the British police doesn’t have similar powers.
Indeed they do, under new powers that came into force last year .. along with many other new powers to tackle protest. Some would say such powers are draconian …
Separately, regarding “police orders”, it has been an offence for many years to “resist or wilfully obstruct a constable in the execution of his/her duty”, so if a police officer is entitled to ask you to move, or leave an area, and you resist, you may be committing an offence. The High Court has, in recent times, granted the police broad injunctions aimed at preventing protests. Breach of an injunction is contempt of court, a criminal offence. So while the exact powers differ, the net result is that the UK police probably have similar powers to the police in Sweden, or elsewhere. See also the recent arrests of republican protestors at King Charles’ coronation – they were essentially detained for no reason at all, with seemingly no consequences for the police even when they admitted it was unlawful. The police also have wide powers to stop vehicles on the road, even if no offence is suspected. Failure to stop is an offence, and failing to produce a licence, or name and address when asked is also an offence. Outside of driving, though, there’s definitely no general power to stop people and ask to see “papers” (ID cards, etc.), unlike in some European countries.
Graham wrote:
No such offence exists in the UK – there is no such concept as ‘police orders’ and issuing orders to the general public is not part of their function.
You don’t generally have to follow “police orders”, but if you “disturb the public order” the police may ask you to leave a particular location. If you refuse, police may remove you by force. You may also be held in custody for up to 6 hours.
In the present case of Greta Thunberg, she was part of a demonstration that was blocking road traffic. I would be surprised if the British police doesn’t have similar powers.
Yeah; that still exists.
But they seem to have stopped totally blatent frame-ups (I got some in the 1980s) and fishing expeditions. I think the change happened 10-15 years ago. Maybe they got sent on the NATS corporate on-message course 
Having a friend regularly stopped on suspicion of committing the offence of “driving while black”, I do not share the rose-tinted views of the British police. Yes, they are less armed and have less powers than in other countries, but they aren’t the saints some here seem to think they are.
As an example, it seems that Greta Thunberg has been charged with ‘disobeying police orders’ during a climate protest.
No such offence exists in the UK – there is no such concept as ‘police orders’ and issuing orders to the general public is not part of their function.
Of course the report may not be accurate on the technicalities of the nature of the charge – bad translation and / or bad journalism – but the Grauniad is better than most in this regard.
The way the police do the (illegal here) random stop and search (usually near pub closing time) is by stopping you and saying “Sir, you were swerving a bit and, you know, it is this time of the day we need to be especially vigilant” 
UK police tend to be a lot more polite than those who carry guns. Carrying a 9mm unavoidably dials up the arrogance level; it is a psychological effect. I’ve written this before; a guy working with gorrilas wasn’t carrying one because, he said, they can tell from your manner and get a lot more tense.
UK police used to do all kinds of “adventures” involving fitting people up (as I well know ) but nowadays (post CPS i.e. last 30 years or so) they don’t dare. And while incorrect shootings have happened in recent years, you aren’t going to get shot accidentally at an airport because those officers don’t have guns in the first place. You would have to be incredibly unlucky to find yourself in some situation where the gun squad is chasing somebody and they mistake you for the other one.
