Abstract

Police possess the power to ‘Stop and Search’ any person and vehicle in the public sphere, but the disproportionate use of such powers raises significant concerns regarding the legitimacy of the power used by them. This paper critically analyses the efficacy and due process implications of the 'Stop and Search' policy in Bangladesh, drawing insights from the British policing model. It also explores the historical development of the policy and its impact on the relationship between communities and law enforcement. Despite due process safeguards outlined in legislative instruments such as section 54 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, statistical and practical evidence raises questions about the effectiveness of the policy in ensuring a balanced and equitable regime. Like the UK, the 'reasonable suspicion' threshold is being examined closely, revealing concerns over arbitrary stops, racial discrimination, and inadequate grounds for searches. The paper conducts a comparative study of the 'Stop and Search' policy in Bangladesh and Herbert Packer's Crime Control Model, highlighting both commonalities and disparities. Although acknowledging the investigative capabilities of 'Stop and Search,' the research questions its effectiveness in substantially contributing to crime detection and prevention. This paper comprehensively explains the dynamics of 'Stop and Search' practices in Bangladesh, shedding light on its impact on civil liberties and the overriding objective of crime prevention.

Keywords

Stop and Search, Police Power, Human Rights, Reasonable Suspicion, Civil Liberties