Affiliate disclosure: This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a commission if you purchase through them, at no extra cost to you.

Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) and Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 are both stop and search powers that can be used in public places, but they work on completely different foundations: Section 1 requires an officer to have reasonable grounds to suspect you personally, while Section 60 allows searches in a defined area with no suspicion of the individual at all. Understanding which power is being used — and what each one permits — is the single most useful thing you can know if you or someone you know is stopped.

Key takeaways

  • Section 1 PACE is an individual power: the officer must have reasonable grounds for suspecting that specific person of carrying prohibited items such as weapons, stolen goods or tools for burglary or theft.
  • Section 60 CJPOA 1994 is a geographic power: once authorised, any officer in the area can stop and search any person or vehicle without needing any grounds to suspect them individually.
  • A Section 60 authorisation must be given by an officer of at least inspector rank, lasts a maximum of 24 hours initially, and can be extended once by a superintendent for a further 24 hours.
  • Both powers must follow the GOWISELY procedure and be recorded, so the practical experience of being searched is similar even though the legal thresholds differ.
  • Because Section 60 removes the safeguard of individual suspicion, its use is meant to be strictly controlled, reviewed at senior officer level and tied to credible intelligence about serious violence.

Section 6: comparison articles (60–69): why these two powers matter

Stop and search is one of the most debated police powers in the UK, and much of the confusion comes from people treating “stop and search” as a single thing. In reality, there are several distinct legal powers, and the two most significant — Section 1 PACE and Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 — sit at opposite ends of the spectrum. Comparing them side by side explains most of the arguments you will hear about fairness, effectiveness and accountability.

As Policing.uk’s comparison of Section 1 versus Section 60 puts it, both are powers to stop and search in a public place, but they have very different thresholds and use cases. That difference in threshold is the heart of this article.

What is Section 1 PACE and when can it be used?

Section 1 of PACE 1984 is the workhorse of UK stop and search. It allows an officer to stop and search a person (or vehicle) in a public place where they have reasonable grounds to suspect that person is carrying:

  • Stolen or prohibited articles
  • Offensive weapons
  • Articles connected with burglary, theft, taking a vehicle without consent, or certain fraud and criminal damage offences

The key phrase is “reasonable grounds”. The suspicion must relate to that individual and be based on objective factors — what the officer has seen, heard, or credible information received — rather than on generalisations about appearance, age or where someone lives. This requirement of individual suspicion is the safeguard that distinguishes Section 1 from area-wide powers.

What the officer must do during a Section 1 search

Under both Section 1 and Section 60, the search must follow the GOWISELY procedure — the officer must give their name and station, the legal power being used, the grounds for the search, what they are looking for, and inform you of your rights to a record of the search. Both types of search must also be recorded, as Policing.uk notes in its side-by-side comparison.

What is Section 60 and how does it differ?

Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 is, as Policing.uk’s guide explains, a significant departure from the general principle that stop and search requires reasonable grounds for suspicion. It is a “suspicion-free” power: once a Section 60 authorisation is in place, any officer in the relevant area can stop and search any person or vehicle without any grounds for suspecting that person of carrying a weapon or dangerous instrument.

That makes it a powerful operational tool — and a controversial one, which Policing.uk acknowledges directly. The power exists to prevent serious violence: if intelligence suggests rival groups are about to clash, or that people are carrying weapons in a particular area, waiting for individual grounds to emerge could mean searching only after someone has been hurt.

Who can authorise Section 60 and what must they believe?

Under the terms described in Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 on legislation.gov.uk, an authorisation can only be given by an officer of at least the rank of inspector. The authorising officer must reasonably believe either:

  1. That incidents involving serious violence may take place in any locality in the police area; or
  2. That persons are carrying dangerous instruments or offensive weapons in any locality in the police area.

A superintendent must then confirm or cancel the authorisation as soon as practicable. This two-tier structure — inspector authorises, superintendent reviews — is the main accountability mechanism replacing the individual-suspicion safeguard.

How long does a Section 60 authorisation last?

The authorisation designates both the area in which the power may be used and its duration. The initial period cannot exceed 24 hours. If violence is imminent, a superintendent can extend the authorisation for a further 24 hours — after that, a fresh authorisation would be needed. So even in the most serious cases, a single Section 60 area-wide power has a hard maximum of 48 hours before senior officers must make a new, reviewable decision.

Section 1 vs Section 60: the differences at a glance

Putting the two powers next to each other makes the contrasts clear:

  • Threshold: Section 1 requires reasonable grounds to suspect the individual; Section 60 requires no suspicion of the individual at all — only a senior officer’s authorisation for the area.
  • Who decides: Section 1 is initiated by the officer on the ground based on what they perceive; Section 60 is initiated by an inspector (or above) and confirmed or cancelled by a superintendent.
  • Scope: Section 1 applies to a person the officer has grounds to suspect; Section 60 applies to every person and vehicle within a designated area for the duration of the authorisation.
  • Purpose: Section 1 targets suspected offences after the fact — weapons, stolen goods, burglary tools; Section 60 is preventive, aimed at stopping serious violence before it happens.
  • Time limit: Section 1 has no area-wide expiry because it is incident-by-incident; Section 60 expires after 24 hours (extendable once to 48).
  • Safeguards during the search: These are broadly shared — GOWISELY and recording requirements apply to both.

What stays the same under both powers?

It is easy to assume a suspicion-free power means a rule-free search. It does not. As Policing.uk notes, both Section 1 and Section 60 searches must follow the GOWISELY procedure and be recorded, and the College of Policing has published authorised professional practice on the use of both powers. In practical terms, the key point supported by Policing.uk is that both Section 1 and Section 60 searches must follow the GOWISELY procedure and be recorded:

  1. Tell you their name and police station (or provide a warrant number in certain circumstances).
  2. State the legal power they are using.
  3. Explain what they are looking for.
  4. Tell you the grounds for the search where the power requires them (under Section 60 the “grounds” are the authorisation itself, not anything about you).
  5. Offer a record of the search.

That record matters: it is your evidence of what happened, why, and by whom, whichever power was used.

Why is Section 60 controversial?

The controversy flows directly from the comparison above. Removing the safeguard of individual suspicion means people can be searched purely because of where they are and when. Policing.uk’s guidance addresses this head-on: it states that Section 60 removes the safeguard of individual suspicion and should be used only where there is a credible intelligence basis for believing serious violence may occur in the specified area, and that its use must be strictly controlled and reviewed at senior officer level.

Critics argue that suspicion-free searches can strain trust between communities and the police, particularly when used repeatedly or broadly. Defenders argue that the power prevents serious injury by allowing pre-emptive action when intelligence shows violence is likely. Both points rest on the same fact: Section 60 trades an individual safeguard for a senior-authorisation safeguard, and its legitimacy depends on that authorisation being used carefully and sparingly.

What happens if an officer misuses the power?

Every search must be recorded, and the recording requirement is what makes misuse visible. If you believe a search was conducted outside the limits of the power used — for example, a Section 60 search in an area or during a period where no authorisation was in force — the record of the search is the starting point for a complaint. The senior-officer review built into Section 60 (superintendent confirmation and the 24-hour limit) exists precisely to create points of accountability.

Which power will you be searched under?

The officer must tell you which power they are using as part of GOWISELY — that is not optional. In practice:

  • As Policing.uk explains, Section 1 requires individual suspicion, so a Section 1 search should be based on grounds specific to you personally.
  • If the officer says there is a Section 60 authorisation in force for the area, no individual grounds will be given because none are required — the authorisation itself is the basis.

Knowing this distinction lets you check two things: that the stated power matches what is happening, and — for Section 60 — that the stated area and duration are consistent with an authorisation. You are entitled to that information during the encounter.

FAQ

Can I refuse a Section 60 search?

No. Once a Section 60 authorisation is in force for the area, any person or vehicle within it can be searched whether or not the officer suspects you of anything. However, the officer must still follow GOWISELY, tell you the power being used and record the search.

Do police need a reason to stop me under Section 60?

Not a reason about you personally. The reason exists at the area level: an inspector or above must have reasonably believed that serious violence may occur, or that people are carrying dangerous instruments or offensive weapons, in the locality. That is the only justification needed.

How long can a Section 60 order last?

A maximum of 24 hours initially, extendable once by a superintendent for a further 24 hours if violence is imminent. After 48 hours, a completely new authorisation would be required.

Is a Section 60 search recorded the same way as a Section 1 search?

Yes. According to Policing.uk’s comparison, both Section 1 and Section 60 searches must follow the GOWISELY procedure and be recorded, and both fall under the College of Policing’s authorised professional practice.

What is the main practical difference between the two powers?

The threshold. Section 1 PACE requires the officer to point to specific, reasonable grounds for suspecting you. Section 60 CJPOA 1994 requires only that you happen to be in a designated area during an authorisation. Everything else — the procedure, the recording, your right to a record — is broadly the same.

Final thoughts

Section 1 and Section 60 are the two poles of UK stop and search law: one built on individual suspicion, one on area-wide authorisation. If you remember only one thing, remember that the officer must tell you which power is being used — and that both powers carry the same procedural protections of GOWISELY and record-keeping. If the encounter doesn’t match the rules described here, the record of the search is where any challenge starts.

And on a completely different note: if the reason you’re browsing comparison articles today is to settle a debate in the workshop rather than in law, our Atomic Compact Impact Driver vs XR: 2026 Comparison breaks down which compact driver suits which kind of DIY work.

Sources

Tweet
Pin
Share
0 Shares