Is the UK becoming a police state?

 by Joseph Evans L6P

Introduction

A police state is defined as ‘a political unit characterised by repressive governmental control of political, economic, and social life usually by an arbitrary exercise of power by police and especially secret police in place of regular operation of administrative and judicial organs of the government according to publicly known legal procedures’[1]. In order to then call the UK a police state, the government would need to be moving towards control of political and social life (it already effectively controls economic life) through exercise of police power, which is most often exercised in the form of arrests.

When the police identify a suspect, they can begin to gather evidence, which includes a warrant or permission to see what the suspect has been posting. If they then believe that the suspect had suspected involvement or attempted involvement in the commission of a criminal offence, and have reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary, they can then order an arrest.[2] In recent years, there have been increased arrests due to social media posts or comments, leading to accusations of the UK becoming a police state, especially in response to the controversial 2022 Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act, which gave police greater powers to reduce protests, even if those protests are non-violent. [3] Now, whether this constitutes the first steps towards an authoritarian ‘police state’ is debatable, but it is certainly worrying for democracy.

The 17th century philosopher, John Locke, the generally accepted ‘father of liberalism’, had the belief that each individual was entitled to ‘natural rights’ of life, liberty and property, which ought not to be limited or impacted by the state - in this case, the police - and in this case specifically, the natural right to liberty. Were the state to infringe liberties - as a police state would be - the citizens would be rightly justified in overthrowing the government, as the only role of government is to protect natural rights in their majority.

In this essay, I argue - through the lens of key liberal thinkers - that the UK is in the process of becoming a police state for three main reasons: firstly, increased police powers, and with those, increased arrests[4], secondly an increase in surveillance especially on the internet, which impacts social life, and thirdly the limits on peaceful protests to stymy political opposition.

Increased Police Power

The function of the police is to detect, prevent and investigate crime.[5] In theory, the prevention of crime - and therefore the prevention of infringement of others’ natural liberties through crime - should be supported by all possible powers. However, it would be short-sighted to suggest that the protection of liberty through the police force does not infringe upon other elements of liberty - and this leads to another liberal thinker, John Stuart Mill. He proposed the ‘harm principle’, which argues that people should be able to behave in any way that they see fit, as long as it does not harm another person, or ‘infringe their natural rights’. In other words, ‘your personal liberty to swing your fist ends where my nose begins’. It is government that provides this blocker between the metaphorical fist and nose, and that which punishes the perpetrator who allows his fist to impact the nose of the victim - therefore, government must have powers which may impact personal liberties, in order to protect the majority of liberties - these powers come in the form of laws, and the police who enforce them. 

The problem with this model is that the government may abuse its power, because it has the ability to increase its power at any time - the increase in police powers granted by the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 can be implied to have reduced individual liberties, as 14382 additional arrests were made the year after to the Act compared to the prior year. One such example of arrests being made that threaten individual liberty are the 107 arrests made of protesters at - ironically - the ‘Kill the Bill’ protest against the increased police powers regarding protests. [6] The majority of those arrested were charged with ‘breaching the peace’, which usually refers to harming someone or their property, or making someone fear that such harm is about to be done. [7] That - whilst subjective - is arguably lawful and necessary. 

However, the Bill being protested allowed police to clamp down on protests deemed ‘too noisy’ or ‘a nuisance’. It can be argued that the only point of a protest is to raise awareness and cause inconvenience - were the protest to be quiet and not inconvenience anyone, it would likely have no bearing on the government. The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 directly contravenes Article 10 of the European Charter of Human Rights, [8] which directly includes the right to protest. Protest is defined as ‘a strong complaint expressing disagreement, disapproval, or opposition.’ [9] I ask you, how can one express a ‘strong complaint’ when unable to make noise or inconvenience anyone? The government’s crackdown on protests, especially at a time where confidence in government - especially the legislative and executive branches - is exceptionally low,[10] is not a strong move, given that it paints them in a very authoritarian light.

Increased Surveillance

Surveillance is another area where the government appears to be moving closer and closer to becoming a police state - a 2011 study showed 1.85 million CCTV cameras in the UK, but by 2020, the generally agreed figure was around 5.2 million.[11] The huge rise in surveillance can surely only be worrying for the UK population, infringing as these cameras are on the right to privacy. 

However, it also needs to be noted that only around 4% of these cameras are owned and operated by the government - the majority are on the property of and operated by independent home-owners, who are - according to Locke and other liberal thinkers - fully entitled to protect their property with said cameras. On the other hand, even 4% of these cameras works out at around 208,000 government operated cameras, which is around 1 camera for every 320 people. Furthermore, the government has access to every photo submitted in order to receive a new British passport - it has already used these photos for facial recognition at the King’s coronation in May in order to ‘identify terror suspects and criminals’. There has been no public consent to this, thus contravening liberty and leading the UK closer to being an authoritarian state. The potential for government misuse of this technology is decidedly Orwellian, and indicates the slow formation of a police state. 

And it doesn’t stop there - with the Investigatory Powers Act 2016[12], the government now can access all internet browsing history, as sites are required to store records of who visits their sites. Again, the Act (whilst arguably combatting terrorism and increasing the quantity of evidence that can be brought against suspects) is an invasion of privacy, something that Locke would agree is a violation of liberty.

Current arrest laws require the police to believe that the suspect is likely to commit a crime, or ‘breach the peace’, and believe that taking the suspect into custody is necessary. In recent years, British police have arrested thousands of people for posts on social media, or messages they send. Aditya Verma sent a Snapchat message to a group chat of his friends in July 2022, joking that he was about to blow up the plane he was on. He was arrested as soon as he landed in Spain, with his message having been intercepted and fighter jets subsequently scrambled[13]. What is interesting about this specific case is that Snapchat is supposed to be encrypted - not even Snapchat itself should be able to read your messages, never mind anyone intercepting them, which begs the question - how exactly did the UK government access his messages without having his phone?

Without wishing to delve into conspiracy theories, the interception suggests that either Meta (owners of Snapchat, along with other social media) are lying about the strength and manner of their encryption, or the government has ways of finding messages. Either way, it suggests that the British public are being lied to, which sends a rather chilling message of a growing police state.

Conclusion

‘You show me a highly unequal society, and I will show you a police state. Or an uprising. There are no counterexamples. None. It's not if, it's when’[14]. Nick Hanauer’s analysis of today’s society (and inequality - especially wealth inequality - is growing) has two distasteful outcomes. Either we surrender to this growing police state in the UK, and surrender that ‘natural freedom’ to liberty, or we do as Locke thought inevitable when a government violated said rights - a revolution, an overthrowing, a rebalancing and the provision of a government that will protect freedoms, that will not lie to us, that will not crackdown on freedom of expression and the right to protest. Which way this society will go is undecided, but one thing is very clear: the UK is moving - through increased police power and surveillance - towards a police state.

Bibliography

[1] Merriam-Webster (2019). Definition of POLICE STATE. [online] Merriam-webster.com. Available at: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/police%20state.

[2] Home Office (2022). PACE Code G 2012 (accessible). [online] GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/pace-code-g-2012/pace-code-g-2012-accessible.

[3] UK Parliament (2022). Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - Parliamentary Bills - UK Parliament. [online] bills.parliament.uk. Available at: https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/2839.

[4] GOV.UK. (n.d.). Police powers and procedures: Stop and search and arrests, England and Wales, year ending 31 March 2023 (second edition). [online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/stop-and-search-and-arrests-year-ending-march-2023/police-powers-and-procedures-stop-and-search-and-arrests-england-and-wales-year-ending-31-march-2023#main-results---arrests [Accessed 28 Jun. 2024].

[5] Brown, J. (2021). Policing in the UK. [online] House of Commons Library. Available at: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8582/.

[6] Kill the Bill protests: More than 100 arrested in London. (2021). BBC News. [online] 4 Apr. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-56632030.

[7] Liberty. (n.d.). Police powers of arrest. [online] Available at: https://www.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/advice_information/police-powers-of-arrest-2/#BOTP.

[8] legislation.gov.uk (1998). Human Rights Act 1998. [online] Legislation.gov.uk. Available at: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1/part/I/chapter/9.

[9] Cambridge Dictionary (2024). protest. [online] @CambridgeWords. Available at: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/protest#google_vignette.

[10] National Centre for Social Research. (2024). BSA 41: Damaged Politics? [online] Available at: https://natcen.ac.uk/publications/bsa-41-damaged-politics.

[11] HR News (2020). Number of CCTV Cameras in the UK reaches 5.2 million. [online] HR News. Available at: https://hrnews.co.uk/number-of-cctv-cameras-in-the-uk-reaches-5-2-million/. 

[12] Home Office (2016). Investigatory Powers Act. [online] GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/investigatory-powers-bill.

[13] British man Aditya Verma appears in Spanish court over plane-bomb hoax. (2024). BBC News. [online] 22 Jan. Available at: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68056421.

[14] https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/nick_hanauer_735889