Police forces are still unable to explain why they’re so racist

London Black Lives Matter peaceful protest
Support us and go ad-free

According to a report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS), “forces still do not fully understand the impact on individuals and communities of the use of police powers”. The report examined police use of force and stop and search against people from Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) backgrounds.

The report highlights that:

Over 35 years on from the introduction of stop and search legislation, no force fully understands the impact of the use of these powers. Disproportionality persists and no force can satisfactorily explain why.

The MacPherson report 22 years on

The people at Black Lives Matter UK shared their views on Twitter. They said that they – and the police – already know exactly why police disproportionately use their powers on people from BAME backgrounds. It’s because of institutional racism:

The MacPherson report was published in 1999 following the racist murder of Stephen Lawrence and police mishandling of the case. It found the Met police to be institutionally racist and set out 70 recommendations on how they should tackle this. Institutional racism, as set out in the MacPherson report, is defined as:

The collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. It can be seen or detected in processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantage minority ethnic people.

It’s appalling that over 20 years after the MacPherson report was published, forces across the UK are still unwilling and unable to recognise the realities of institutional racism and disproportionate policing, let alone start tackling them.

More recent interventions

In response to the HMICFRS report, shadow justice secretary David Lammy pointed to an independent review which he led. It looked into the treatment of, and outcomes for, BAME people in the criminal justice system:

Lammy’s 2017 review found that very little had changed since the MacPherson report. And in some cases, things had regressed. Despite making up 14% of the UK population, people from BAME backgrounds made up 25% of prisoners. Meanwhile, the BAME proportion of youth prisoners rose from 25% to 41% between 2006 and 2016. And while Black people make up just 3% of the population, they “accounted for 12% of adult prisoners” and “more than 20% of children in custody”.

In spite of these high profile calls for institutional reform, we’ve seen little positive change in policing and the justice system. Black people continue to bear the brunt of racist policing. According to 2019/20 data, officers are:

  • 9 times more likely to stop and search Black people – 18 times more likely to do so using section 60 powers.
  • “5.7 times more likely to use force against Black people than white people”.
  • 8 times more likely to handcuff Black people.
  • 9 times more likely to draw tasers on Black people.
  • 3 times more likely to use spithoods on Black people.

Today, Black people account for 8% of deaths in police custody. It’s been over 50 years since Yorkshire police murdered David Oluwale. But since then, not one officer has been successfully prosecuted for killing a Black person in police custody. The joint enterprise doctrine and gang databases continue to target and criminalise young Black men. Meanwhile, forces continue to surveil and criminalise Muslim communities as a result of Prevent and the war on terror.

Institutional racism bolstered by the state

Racist policing doesn’t take place in a vacuum. The structural racism of the state bolsters institutional racism in the police. Here, it’s useful to refer to the Institute of Race Relations’ 1998 definition of institutional racism as:

that which, covertly or overtly, resides in the policies, procedures, operations and culture of public or private institutions – reinforcing individual prejudices and being reinforced by them in turn.

We see this manifested in the government’s racist immigration laws, border control practices, and the hostile environment. It’s in a civil service with a culture of racism and exclusion. Resistance to acknowledging the legacies of slavery, colonialism, and empire in schoolsuniversities, and beyond. And failures to protect the human rights of Black people in the UK. Furthermore, the government is responsible for prison and police expansion.

We have ample evidence to suggest that Britain’s police are institutionally racist. Forces should be beyond getting to grips with the basics of racism and disproportionality. They should have been doing serious work to tackle it for decades. We don’t need any more reviews – we need action.

Featured image via Ehimetalor Akhere Unuabona/Unsplash

Support us and go ad-free

Do your bit for independent journalism

Did you know that less than 1.5% of our readers contribute financially to The Canary? Imagine what we could do if just a few more people joined our movement to achieve a shared vision of a free and fair society where we nurture people and planet.

We need you to help out, if you can.

When you give a monthly amount to fund our work, you are supporting truly independent journalism. We hold power to account and have weathered many attempts to shut us down and silence the counterpoint to the mainstream.

You can count on us for rigorous journalism and fearless opposition to an increasingly fascist government and right wing mainstream media.

In return you get:

  • Advert free reading experience
  • Behind the scenes monthly e-newsletter
  • 20% discount from our shop

 

The Canary Fund us
  • Show Comments
    1. It’s a performance. It’s not even prejudice or inequality of treatment. The police _perform_ racist acts to keep a certain kind of white English person onside. They handle sexual assault in their crass and negligent fashion to keep misogynists onside. They have no structure of ethics in their minds that would enable them to hear criticism because it would serve no purpose.

      The police don’t evolve because it’s not their function to serve the public except to make these performances visible while with most of their resources they carry out their true function. There is no dialogue of the kind that David Lammy, good man though he is, thinks he is engaged in. Look at the former IPCC becoming the IOPC. It’s rebranding only, for the sake of preserving this set of procedures to protect the police’s function and true intentions. I myself have received a gleeful email from the supposed IOPC telling me that in practice the IOPC’s ‘new powers’ are not operational. This person was laughing at me, for asking the IOPC to review a corrupt IPCC investigation – I am currently having what on paper is the IOPC dealing with another aspect of the case the IPCC supposedly dealt with. In practice a police force is covering up its officers’ misconduct again – there _is_ no IOPC really, police forces investigate themselves under the IOPC branding, though there is an office of button pressers and typists merely coordinating mail between public and police forces. I cite all this because it is consistently about performative actions and not sincere and conscientious engagement. Alan Pughsley, head of Kent Police took the knee last year, but this was performance – he doesn’t care, doesn’t get the discourse, it’s of no purpose to his role other than to help him shape this character.

      If we don’t ask the right questions no answers will reveal themselves, and worse, making complaints as if they will be heard and acted upon positively, as if there is any big conversation to be had, gives corrupt institutions the means of perfecting their camouflage.

      The same model of performance is everywhere from national and local government to mental health services. We are as if kids trying to use words to get parents not to continue abuse; they nod; nothing changes.

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.