§ As amended (in the Standing Committee), again considered.
§ Question again proposed,-That the clause be read a Second time.
§ Mr. HurdIt is right to be doubly careful and cautious when dealing with intimate body searches. When dealing with the subject, however, the House should be reminded of what we propose for intimate body search. We propose — it is controversial on the Government side of the House—that an officer may give authorisation only if he has reasonable grounds for believing that the person to be searched might have concealed on him an article which could be used to cause physical injury to himself or others and which might be so used while he is in police detention or in the custody of the court and that cannot be found 108 without an intimate search. We have narrowed down the possibility of an intimate body search to cases when it is necessary to avert tragedy in a police station. We must remember the extremely narrow scope of the proposed power.
New clause 15 would require any intimate search of juveniles to be carried out by doctors. We have repeatedly made it clear that we hope that all intimate searches, whatever the age of the person concerned, will be carried out by a doctor. There are occasions, however, when such searches must be carried out. If no one else can or will undertake it and a doctor is not present, cannot be found or is unwilling to undertake it, it must still be done. I am afraid that that remains the case whatever the age of the person concerned. If we imposed a rigid rule that required all searches of juveniles to be performed by a doctor and thus drew a distinction between juveniles and others, there would be an incentive to use juveniles for precisely the purpose that we are trying to avoid.
The second element of new clause 15 is a requirement that intimate searches of juveniles should take place in the presence of a parent or other responsible adult. I refer the hon. Gentleman who, like the rest of us, is trying to think his way carefully and conscientiously through the problem, to paragraph 3 of annexe A of the draft code on detention which provides that:
An intimate search of an arrested juvenile may take place only in the presence of the appropriate adult of the same sex".We believe that that is right and that the code is the right place to state such a requirement. Indeed, it goes rather further than the provision which the hon. Gentleman has in mind, which gives the juvenile a veto.New clause 15 also forbids in all circumstances the intimate search of a child under 14. We discussed the matter in Committee. The hon. Gentleman obviously feels strongly about it and has brought the matter up again today. That is his right. I hope that it will never be necessary to undertake an intimate body search of a child under 14. I cannot think of a case of it being necessary.
The hon. Gentleman asked whether we lived in a civilised society. Some of us hope that we do, but, whether or not it is civilised, our society is besieged and undermined by terrorism. Unfortunately, there can be no guarantee that wicked men such as terrorists will not use children, precisely because of the greater protection and consideration that children rightly receive. It would not be sensible to recommend to the House a provision saying that under no circumstances should there be an intimate search of a child, even of those years, bearing in mind that we are referring only to intimate searches that are absolutely necessary to avert some terrible tragedy in a police station.
For those reasons, while I sympathise very much with the motives that led the hon. Gentleman to table the new clauses, I must draw his attention to the Bill's provisions and to the limits, particularly in clause 49 and in annexe A of the draft code of detention. Taken together, those measures provide reasonable protection. They go as far as we can in the very imperfect and sometimes tragic world in which we live.
§ Question put and negatived.