POLITICIANS have questioned Police Scotland's use of stop search following new research that warns the tactic might infringe human rights and could lead to public disorder.
A report by Edinburgh University found stop search increased by more than 300% in many areas of Scotland between 2005 and 2010.
Academic Kath Murray found the tactic was legally questionable, "unenforceable" and that Scots were four times more likely to be stop searched than people south of the Border.
Last night Labour's justice spokesman Graeme Pearson said Police Scotland and the Justice Secretary needed to answer key questions as a result of the research findings. He also questioned the timing of a press conference on Wednesday pointing out the benefits of stop search.
He said: "Where is the policing by consent delivered? How is democratic accountability delivered in these circumstances? And who authorised and approved this huge rise in stop and search?
"The Cabinet Secretary should not hide behind the façade that these things are operational decisions."
Earlier this week, Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill and Police Scotland praised stop-searches for helping to produce a massive drop in violent crime and released new figures showing more than 500,000 people had been stop searched in the past nine months, a 0.2% fall on the previous year.
Police Scotland assistant chief constable Wayne Mawson said: "The use of stop and search... used in the right place at the right time, is an effective and legal tactic."
A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: "Stop and search, in the right circumstances, can help reduce crime. Police Scotland's statistics published this week suggest this approach is working."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article