What Is
Section 1 PACE?
The Authority Guide to UK Stop & Search Powers, Reasonable Suspicion, and PACE Code A Protections (2026 Edition).
Authority Summary
Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) gives police officers in England and Wales the power to stop and search individuals where they have reasonable grounds to suspect stolen goods, offensive weapons, or prohibited articles. The power requires objective suspicion and must comply with Code A safeguards.
1. The Short Answer
Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, commonly known as Section 1 PACE, is the primary statutory power used by police in England and Wales to conduct a search of a person or vehicle in a public place. It is the legal engine of the "stop and search" regime.
Unlike "Section 60" searches which can be performed without individual grounds in specific high-violence areas, Section 1 PACE is inherently tied to the individual being searched. To trigger this power, an officer MUST satisfy the Reasonable Suspicion test.
Objective Test
Suspicion must be based on facts, information, or intelligence that would lead a reasonable person to believe a prohibited item will be found.
Public Context
The power applies in public places, or any location to which the public has access (including gardens of properties where the officer has a right to be).
2. The Legal Framework
The introduction of PACE in 1984 was a watershed moment in British policing. It replaced a patchwork of local powers (some dating back to the 19th century) with a single, unified national framework.
Section 1 itself states: "A constable may exercise any power conferred by this section... in any place to which at the time when he proposes to exercise the power the public or any section of the public has access, on payment or otherwise, as of right or by virtue of express or implied permission."
PACE Code A: The Regulatory Engine
While the Act gives the power, Code A gives the instructions. Code A is the statutory Code of Practice for stop and search. In 2026, it remains the primary document governing the dynamic between officer and citizen. It dictates how suspicion is formed, how the search must be conducted to respect human dignity, and the meticulous recording obligations that follow.
Crucially, Code A provides that stop and search must be used fairly, responsibly, and with respect. It specifically prohibits the use of personal characteristics (race, age, appearance) as the sole basis for a search. Any breach of Code A is not just a procedural error; it is a potential breach of the Human Rights Act 1998 (Article 8).
The Geographical Scope: "Any Place"
A critical aspect of the Section 1 framework is where it can be used. The statute defines this as "any place to which the public has access." This is broader than just a high street. It includes:
Semi-Public Spaces
Shopping centres, private car parks where the public are allowed, and parks with restricted opening hours. Establishments like pubs or private clubs are included the moment the public are invited in.
Inhabited Places (Non-Dwellings)
It does NOT allow a search in a "dwelling" (house). However, it DOES allow a search in a garden or yard belonging to a house if the officer believes the person is NOT the resident and has NO permission to be there.
If an officer stops you on your own driveway to search you under Section 1, and you are the resident, they are technically exceeding the geographical scope of the power unless they have a separate power of entry or arrest. This limitation is fundamental to the concept of Article 8 ECHR Rights (Right to Private and Family Life).
Authority Archive Interlink
Section 1 PACE is the public-facing engine of stop and search, but more intrusive powers exist for custody and specialty scenarios. Explore the secondary authority guides below.
Historical Context: From "Sus Law" to PACE
To understand Section 1, one must understand what preceded it. Before 1984, the police relied on the 'Sus Law' (Section 4 of the Vagrancy Act 1824). This allowed for the arrest of 'suspected persons' frequenting public places with intent to commit a felony. The Sus Law was widely criticized for allowing arbitrary, subjective stops based on little more than an officer's intuition.
The Brixton Riots of 1981 and the subsequent Scarman Report highlighted the devastating impact of these powers on community relations. This led directly to the creation of PACE 1984, which introduced the Objective Reasonable Suspicion test. Section 1 was designed to be a balanced power: effective for crime prevention, but strictly regulated to prevent the abuses of the past. It transformed the police from a body with arbitrary discretion into one governed by statutory accountability.
In 2026, the framework remains the primary check on State power. If an officer fails to follow the rules laid out in PACE and Code A, the search becomes unlawful, potentially rendering any evidence inadmissible and exposing the Force to civil litigation.
3. Reasonable Suspicion
"Reasonable suspicion" is the filter between lawful policing and arbitrary interference. It is not enough for an officer to have a "hunch" or a "feeling." The suspicion must be objective. This means that if the same facts were presented to a reasonable, third-party observer, they would reach the same conclusion.
Snippet Focus: The Threshold
What counts as reasonable suspicion?
Reasonable suspicion requires specific, objective facts that would lead a reasonable person to suspect involvement in crime. It cannot be based solely on personal characteristics or generalised assumptions.
The Two-Pronged Test
In technical legal terms, an officer must satisfy two levels of suspicion:
1. Subjective Suspicion
The officer themselves must GENUINELY suspect they will find a prohibited article. If an officer searches someone they know is innocent just to meet a target, the search is unlawful from the outset.
2. Objective Justification
That genuine belief must be based on EXTERNAL facts. If the officer's belief is based on a dream or a 'vibe', it fails the objective test. There must be an evidentiary bridge between the person and the crime.
The Case of O'Hara v Chief Constable
The definitive legal authority for this test is O'Hara v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary [1997]. The House of Lords ruled that the 'reasonable grounds' must be based on specific facts known to the officer at the time. An officer cannot simply rely on an instruction from a superior to "search everyone in this area" unless they are provided with the underlying intelligence that creates the grounds for that specific individual.
This ensures that individual accountability remains at the heart of the power. If an officer is sued for an unlawful search, they cannot hide behind a sergeant's orders; they must personally justify the objective grounds that led them to act.
Rice v Connolly: The Right to Silence
A frequent source of tension in Section 1 encounters is the suspect's refusal to answer questions. In Rice v Connolly [1966], the court established that a citizen is under no legal obligation to answer police questions or provide their name and address (outside of specific statutory requirements like the Road Traffic Act).
Crucially: A person's refusal to answer questions or their decision to walk away from an officer cannot, on its own, form reasonable suspicion for a search. If an officer searches you simply because you 'declined to chat' or 'looked away,' they are in flagrant breach of Code A. Silence is a right, not a reason for suspicion. This principle was reinforced in Rice v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire, where it was clarified that even if such behaviour is 'obstructive' in spirit, it is not 'obstruction' in the eyes of the law if the officer has no legal right to demand the information.
Valid Grounds vs. Prohibited Grounds
If an officer's decision were reviewed by a bystander, would that bystander agree that the suspicion was logical? Code A Paragraph 2.2 defines the 'Hunch' as a prohibited basis. Grounds must be specific to the individual and their current behaviour or intelligence.
Lawful Indicators
- — Sighting of an object (e.g. a handle protruding from a pocket).
- — Smells (e.g. the distinct scent of cannabis).
- — Intelligence-led (A broadcast matching the description).
- — Evasive Behaviour (Sprinting away upon seeing police).
Unlawful Indicators
- — Appearance (Style of dress, tattoos, or hairstyle).
- — Demographics (Race, age, or religion).
- — Previous Interaction ("I've searched you before").
- — Presence in Area ("It's Friday night in a rough area").
The "Hunch" Trap
Reasonable suspicion can NEVER be based on Generalised assumptions. When an officer says, "You look like the type of person who carries a knife," they have failed the Section 1 PACE test. Without a specific reason connecting YOU to a PROHIBITED ARTICLE, the search is a breach of your civil liberties.
The distinction between a "hunch" and "suspicion" is the foundation of Article 8 (Right to Privacy) compatibility. In 2026, with the rise of AI-assisted policing, the courts are even more vigilant about ensuring that "human reasoning" remains at the heart of the reasonable suspicion test.
4. Prohibited Items
An officer's power to search under Section 1 is not universal. They cannot search you for "anything." The law specifies categories of prohibited articles that fall under this specific mandate. If an officer searches you for something outside these categories (e.g., searching for a stolen laptop under a power meant for drugs), the search may be ultra vires (beyond their power).
1. Stolen Goods
Section 1(2)(a) allows the search for anything which has been stolen or otherwise unlawfully obtained. This is broad—it covers everything from a mobile phone to a shoplifted bottle of alcohol. The suspicion must be tied to the specific item; an officer cannot search for 'general stolen property' without a factual basis for believing such property exists on the person.
2. Offensive Weapons
Section 1(2)(b) covers articles made, adapted, or intended for causing injury to persons. This includes obvious weapons (like knuckle dusters) or mundane items being carried as weapons (e.g. a baseball bat in a context suggesting imminent violence). The law distinguishes between weapons 'per se' and those intended for use as such.
3. Bladed Articles
Specifically covered to include knives or anything with a blade or point (excluding small folding pocket knives with a blade under 3 inches, unless carried with intent to harm). Locking knives are prohibited per se in public without a 'good reason' following the ruling in Harris v DPP [1993].
4. Articles for Theft
Often called "Going Equipped" under Section 25 of the Theft Act 1968. Articles used in the course of or in connection with burglary, theft, taking a vehicle, or fraud. This includes screwdrivers, gloves, or scanning devices if the circumstances suggest criminal intent.
Fireworks & Nuisance
Under Section 1(8A), officers can also search for fireworks if they suspect they are being possessed by someone under 18 in a public place, or if they suspect someone is using them to cause alarm, distress, or injury.
It is worth noting that Controlled Drugs are actually searched for under Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, not Section 1 PACE. However, the procedural safeguards (like GOWISELY) remain identical.
5. The GOWISELY Protocol
For a Section 1 search to be lawful, the officer must provide the suspect with specific information before the search begins. In English police training, this is memorised through the GOWISELY acronym. Failure to provide any of these elements usually renders the search unlawful.
Grounds
The factual basis for the suspicion. This must be a specific 'why', avoiding vague terms like 'acting suspiciously'. For example: 'I suspect you are carrying a weapon because I witnessed you concealing a metallic object in your jacket as you walked away from the scene of the reported disturbance.'
Object
The specific item they are looking for (e.g., 'I am searching for a prohibited knife or stolen jewellery'). The search must remain proportionate; an officer cannot search a small wallet for a large crowbar.
Warrant
Showing a warrant card is MANDATORY if the officer is NOT in uniform. If they refuse to show it, the search is an unlawful detention. In uniform, they only need to show it upon request.
Identity
The name and shoulder number (collar number) of the officer. This identifies the specific individual exercising the power and is the first link in the accountability chain.
Station
The specific police station the officer is based at. This is critical for post-search documentation and any subsequent legal challenges or complaints through the IOPC.
Entitlement
The citizen must be informed of their legal right to a record of the search. In 2026, this is usually provided via a digital code or reference number linked to a secure police portal.
Legal Power
The specific law being invoked. They must state: 'I am searching you under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.' Invoking the wrong power can invalidate the search.
You are Detained
The definitive statement that you are 'detained for the purpose of a search'. This clarifies that you are not free to leave, but you are also not yet under arrest.
Why compliance matters
The courts have been very clear: the GOWISELY requirements are not optional "best practice"—they are legal prerequisites. If an officer forgets to tell you their name or doesn't explain the grounds, the search is an assault. Any evidence found thereafter (such as a weapon) may still be thrown out of court under Section 78 PACE.
6. Removal of Clothing
A Section 1 PACE search on the street is strictly limited in terms of how much clothing an officer can ask you to remove. This is to protect the dignity of the individual and prevent "street strip-searches" which are inherently disproportionate and humiliating.
J.O.G Rules
In a public place, an officer can only require you to remove your Jacket, Outer coat, and Gloves (J.O.G).
Headgear & Shoes
Officers can ask you to remove headgear or shoes, but only if they have reason to suspect something is hidden there. This should usually be done out of public view.
M.T.P Searches
"More Thorough Person" searches must be done in a police van or station, away from the public eye, and usually by an officer of the same sex.
The Strip Search Threshold
A full strip search (removal of all clothing) can never be conducted on the street under Section 1 PACE. It must be conducted at a police station (or in a private area like a police van in extreme exigency), and it requires significantly higher justification. For children, a strip search additionally requires the presence of an Appropriate Adult.
If an officer attempts to reach inside your underwear or lift your shirt in public, they are likely in breach of Code A and the Human Rights Act (Article 8).
7. Section 1 vs Section 60
A common point of confusion for the public is the difference between an "ordinary" Section 1 PACE search and a "suspicionless" Section 60 search. While both lead to the same result—a person being searched—the legal hurdles for the police are vastly different.
| Feature | Section 1 PACE | Section 60 (CJPOA) |
|---|---|---|
| Suspicion Required | Yes (Individual Reasonable Suspicion) | No (Suspicionless) |
| Authorisation | Individual Constable | Inspector or above |
| Area-Specific | Anywhere (Public Place) | Designated Area Only |
| Time Limit | None (Static Power) | 24–48 Hours |
The Philosophical Shift
Section 1 PACE is reactive; it responds to existing suspicion. Section 60 is proactive; it is used when a senior officer believes violence is about to happen. Because Section 60 is more intrusive (removing the suspicion requirement), it is subject to much tighter internal oversight and must be renewed by a senior officer (usually a Commander or Assistant Chief Constable) if it exceeds 24 hours.
In both cases, however, the officer must still provide the GOWISELY information. The fact that a search is "suspicionless" under Section 60 does not mean it is "rule-less." Failure to comply remains a breach of PACE Code A.
To understand the specific nuances of suspicionless searches, we recommend reading our dedicated guide on Section 60 Stop & Search.
8. Unlawful Search
What happens if an officer conducts a Section 1 search without reasonable suspicion, or fails to provide the GOWISELY information? In the eyes of the law, that search is no longer a lawful police action—it is a trespass and an assault.
The Exclusion of Evidence (Section 78)
If an unlawful search leads to the discovery of evidence (e.g., a knife or stolen goods), the defence solicitor will use Section 78 of PACE to argue that the evidence should be excluded. The court has the power to refuse evidence if its admission would have an "adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings."
Historically, UK courts have been more lenient than US courts (who follow the "fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine), but flagrant breaches of Code A often lead to cases being dropped before they even reach a jury.
Civil Claims
Victims of unlawful searches can sue the police for damages. This includes 'aggravated damages' if the search was conducted in a way that was particularly humiliating or racially motivated.
Police Complaints
Misuse of Section 1 powers is a breach of the Standards of Professional Behaviour. Complaints can be made to the Force's Professional Standards Department or the IOPC.
9. Data & Disproportionality
Stop and search data is among the most scrutinised statistics in UK policing. Every Section 1 search must be recorded, including the ethnicity of the person searched (as perceived by the officer or self-defined). This is captured in the National Stop and Search Data Standard.
Institutional Transparency & Scrutiny
In 2026, many police forces have moved to real-time digital recording via handheld devices. This data is uploaded instantly to a central database, making it visible to Internal Quality Assurance teams almost immediately. These teams look for patterns: officers with unusually high stop-counts but zero find-rates, or officers who consistently stop a single demographic without clear intelligence.
Furthermore, Community Scrutiny Panels (comprised of local citizens and experts) regularly review body-worn video (BWV) and search records to ensure that the use of Section 1 remains proportionate. Proponents of stop and search point to the volume of weapons removed from the streets; critics point to the disproportionate impact on minority communities and the potential damage to public trust.
The "Confidence GAP"
The Home Office publishes annual figures under the "Police Powers and Procedures" report. While the number of Section 1 searches fluctuates with political priority, the "find rate" and "arrest rate" remain the key metrics for legitimacy. If a force is STOPPING thousands but only finding weapons in 5% of cases, the 'reasonable suspicion' threshold is effectively being degraded.
Conversely, "intelligence-led" policing which focuses Section 1 powers on known offenders or high-risk volatile situations tends to yield higher find-rates, which institutional bodies like the HMICFRS use to score force performance. This creates a constant tension between high-volume policing and high-accuracy policing.
Maintaining a neutral, data-driven approach to these statistics is vital for institutional legitimacy. For more on how the police are held accountable for these figures, see our guide on the National Black Police Association.
10. After the Search
Once the physical search is concluded, the interaction enters its final legal phase. The outcome of a Section 1 search Typically falls into one of four broad categories, each with its own set of legal consequences and subsequent documentation requirements.
No Further Action
The most common outcome. If nothing prohibited is found, the detention ends immediately. You are free to continue your journey. The officer must still offer you a search record, which remains as a 'negative search' on their stats.
Seizure
If prohibited items are found (but do not warrant arrest, e.g., low-level drugs or a minor shoplifted item), they will be seized. You may be issued an on-the-spot warning or receipt for the goods.
Arrest
If the discovery of an item (e.g., a locking knife, a firearm, or significant amounts of stolen property) necessitates it, the officer will arrest you. The 'Search for Evidence' power under Section 32 PACE then usually replaces the Section 1 power.
Resolution
For minor offences, an officer may deal with the matter via a 'Community Resolution' or a penalty notice. This avoids a formal arrest but still requires a meticulous record of the encounter.
The Search Record: Your Digital Receipt
You must be offered a record of the search at the time. In 2026, this is almost always a digital receipt sent via text or email, or a reference number linked to the officer's handheld device. If it is not practicable to provide it then (e.g., in a high-tension public order situation), the officer must tell you which station you can go to to collect it.
This record is a Statutory Document. It must include the date, time, location, the reason for the search, the self-defined ethnicity of the person, and the outcome. If you later wish to challenge the search, this record is the primary evidence used in your complaint or civil claim.
Authority Note: For those transitioning from a search to police custody, our authority guide on Post-Charge Procedures explains the subsequent legal rights, including the 'Right to Information' under PACE Code C, and custody time limits which start the moment you arrive at the Custody Suite.
Direct Answers
Authority FAQ
What is Section 1 PACE?
Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) is the primary power used by police to stop and search persons and vehicles in public places. It requires the officer to have 'reasonable grounds to suspect' that they will find stolen goods, offensive weapons, or other prohibited articles.
Does Section 1 require suspicion?
Yes. Unlike Section 60, Section 1 PACE requires the individual officer to have specific, objective 'reasonable grounds for suspicion' before they can conduct a search. It cannot be used arbitrarily or for general 'fishing expeditions'.
Can police stop you for no reason?
No. Under Section 1 PACE, a stop and search without reasonable suspicion is unlawful. While police can stop you to ask questions (voluntary interaction), they cannot detain or search you without a valid legal power and objective grounds.
What is reasonable suspicion?
Reasonable suspicion is an objective test. It must be based on facts, information, or intelligence that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the person being searched is in possession of a prohibited item. It cannot be based on personal characteristics like race, age, or appearance.
What is GOWISELY?
GOWISELY is an acronym for the mandatory information an officer must provide before a search: Grounds, Object, Warrant card (if plain clothes), Identity, Station, Entitlement to a record, Legal power, and 'You are detained'.
Can police search your bag?
Yes. Section 1 PACE allows the search of anything the person is carrying, including bags, backpacks, and packages, provided the officer has reasonable suspicion that the bag contains a prohibited item.
Can police search your car?
Yes. Section 1 PACE applies to 'persons and vehicles'. An officer can search a vehicle if they have reasonable suspicion that it contains stolen or prohibited items, or if they suspect it is being used in connection with an offence.
Can police search minors?
Yes. The law does not exempt children from stop and search. However, officers are expected to handle such searches with extra sensitivity, and more intrusive searches (like strip searches) require the presence of an Appropriate Adult.
Can you refuse a Section 1 search?
Physically resisting a search is usually the offence of 'Obstruction'. If you believe the search is illegal, you should state your objection but comply physically. You can challenge the search's legality later in court or via a complaint.
Do police need a warrant?
No. Section 1 PACE is a statutory power that allows for search and seizure in public places without a warrant, provided the officer meets the 'reasonable suspicion' threshold and follows the GOWISELY protocols.
Can police search your phone under Section 1?
Generally, no. Section 1 is for physical prohibited items (weapons, drugs, stolen goods). Searching the contents of a phone (messages/data) usually requires a higher threshold under Section 19 or 32 PACE, or a RIPA notice.
What happens if police misuse Section 1?
If a search is ruled unlawful (e.g., no reasonable suspicion), any evidence found may be excluded under Section 78 PACE. Additionally, the individual may be entitled to a civil claim for assault or false imprisonment.
Can police search at night?
Yes. Section 1 PACE powers apply 24 hours a day, provided the officer is in a place where they have lawful access (essentially any public place or private place where they alternate with permission).
Is Section 1 the same as Section 60?
No. Section 1 requires individual reasonable suspicion. Section 60 (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act) allows suspicionless searches within a specific area for a limited time, authorized by a senior officer.
Authority Context
Institutional
Interlinking & Resources
Reasonable suspicion is the primary threshold for Section 1 PACE, but it is not the only power officers possess for stop and search. To understand how suspicionless stop and search differs from Section 1, our full Section 60 Explainer provides detailed statutory comparison of the 'no suspicion' standard. This comparison is vital for those living in areas subjected to frequent public order notices, as the procedural transparency expectations remain identical even when the threshold drops.
If a stop and search escalates into arrest, our Arrest & Custody Authority Guide explains the critical transition from street detention to formal custody authorisation and the associated time limits. Understanding the 'clock' is fundamental for anyone detained for a search that becomes a deprivation of liberty.
Where stop and search powers intersect with digital evidence, the search of a device is governed by entirely different protocols. Our Can Police Search Your Phone? explainer clarifies seizure versus data examination thresholds and the RIPA Section 49 notice requirements. Many citizens are unaware that Section 1 PACE does not automatically grant an officer access to their digital data, even if the phone itself is seized as stolen property.
For broader oversight context, specifically concerning the accountability of officers exercising these powers, the National Black Police Association (NBPA) section outlines how institutional scrutiny is applied to stop and search outcomes. This includes historical context on the Macpherson Report and the drive for fairer policing standards in a multi-cultural society. The role of the IOPC and HMICFRS is also detailed in our guide on Police Misconduct and Public Office accountability.