This essay discusses whether the criminal justice system in England and Wales is institutionally racist. This paper starts with an overview of the issue, then pivoting to how infrastructural biases influence crime analytics. It provides a display of problematic areas in the justice system and the possible solution to them and ends with a conclusion where all of the main points are summarised.
The criminal justice system is a foundation on which human society relies to be protected from abuse and violations. It has been constructed with the purpose of protection and retribution regardless of one’s age, gender, race, and social status. However, this protective barrier has been and continues to be compromised by the influence of systematic and institutional racism. These injustices dominate various aspects of ethnic people’s lives, from unlawful searches to unfair prosecutions (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 1). Over the years, the processes most commonly associated with racial prejudices (e.g., stop and search) have been questioned and reformed, although not without hindrances for the police leaders’ part (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 5). Despite all efforts, institutional racism poses a significant problem within the justice system.
Impact of Infrastructural Biases on Crime Analytics
It is not a secret that criminal statistics that are used in developing strategies to combat and prevent crime could be influenced by infrastructural biases. This means that the actual crime rates are cannot be separated from the possible effects of racial discrimination. This statement is supported by the finding of serious under-recording and disruptive impact of targets within police-based statistics. This discovery has led to police recorded crime being discharged from National Statistics position (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 3). Given this information, it is easy to imagine how the falsification of data regarding ratios and prominences in crime within Black, Asian, and minority ethnic groups (BAME) has affected the justice system. Injecting biases into supposedly reliable data would lead to solid justification of racial discrimination not only in the eyes of the police forces, but also in the eyes of general communities.
To mend and prevent the expansion of misinformation, non-police-related reporting comes into play. One of the examples of this reporting is the Lammy Review. It was commissioned in 2017 by two Prime Ministers, David Cameron and Theresa May, and headed by David Lammy. This review aimed to compile recommendations on how to reduce the number of BAME offenders and suggest adequate solutions to the inequity. The review subjects included court and prosecutorial systems, secure institutions such as prisons, and rehabilitation. As a result, it showed that arrest rates among ethnic groups are higher than among white people, and this unequal representation begins at the very start of criminal justice. The most significant disparities were found at the arrest point, with minor contributions along the process. As studies before have provided, the Lammy Review supports the statistics of black people being subjected to stop and search more frequently. It also affirmed that black, “mixed”, and Asian individuals were arrested more consistently for drug dealing and robberies (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 5). The presented research results serve as evidence of institutional racism within the police infrastructure since these statistics are unlikely to result from irregular occurrences.
In addition, the review displayed how the criminal justice system affects people’s perception of justice in general. Ethnic communities tend to demonstrate a lack of trust towards policing due to inequality prominent in search or investigation tactics. (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 5). This mistrust could affect not only the ethnic people’s desire to cooperate with police forces, but also influence their attitudes towards other authority-related systems, including their willingness to seek help from the police.
Other than government-commissioned reviews, one can resort to self-report surveys. Self-report surveys are proved to be the most reliable way to ascertain levels and patterns of criminal activity (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 3). Through these means, people can report facts about themselves regarding a wide variety of topics and issues. For example, in England and Wales, self-report data suggest that ethnic groups are less involved in drug usage than white people. In terms of general criminal activity, these statistics claim that black and ethnic people offend at the same rate or lower than white people. These numbers are influenced by lifestyle differences between white people and ethnic groups, such as amounts of consumed alcohol, cultural attitudes towards inebriation, and religious values (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 3). It is also important to mention that drug usage differs depending on ethnicity. For example, black and Asian groups are prone to consuming less-dangerous substances with lower legal classification (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 4). Seeing how these self-reported statistics differ from arrest rates raises the question of whether or not there is an actual correlation between the crime committed by ethnic groups and policing.
Racially Charged Problem Areas in Justice System
The disproportionate and unfair employment of law against citizens of the UK has been pronounced within several problematic areas. The first of them is called the stop and search method. Search and stop is a tactic that implies briefly stopping a person and searching them for illegal possessions. A report called The Numbers in Black and White provided information regarding continuous practices of unfounded usage of stop and search. Moreover, this tactic was used on black people seven times more frequently than on white people. These tendencies were pronounced among all 43 territorial law enforcements (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 6). In recent years, stop and search has been reduced, although the remaining efforts appeared to be targeting ethnic people with greater intensity. Although BAME are abused by this tactic more often, the rate of drug possession among black people is lower than among white people (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 13). It indicates that systematic racism might inadvertently serve as a leeway for non-BAME drug users and dealers to flourish.
Another problematic area for BAME in the justice system is the area of arrests and out of court disposals. There is a higher likelihood of black people being arrested after stop and search than white people. However, black people are offered out of court disposals less frequently than white people. After stop and search reforms, the number of arrests caused by it has decreased significantly, but not for people of colour. If, after stop and search, a person is found to be carrying an illegal object, the police may resolve the situation by charging an offender with a warrant or other applicable measure. This is called out of court disposal, and they are also sources of disparities. Statistically, white people are more frequently given out of court disposals than BAME (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 38). These disparities subvert black and ethnic people deeper into the criminal world, laying a firmer ground for institutionalised racism.
Finally, sentencing – the conclusive step of the investigation process – has shown to be highly compromised by systematic racism. For example, black people have been sentenced for drug use at a rate eight times higher than that rate for white people. In addition, a quarter of convicted for possession of cannabis consisted of black people despite the fact that they make up four per cent of the nation. Another statistic shows that black people were put into immediate custody at approximately nine times the rate for white people. In comparison, suspended sentences were offered to black people at approximately five times the rate for white people (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 42). Recently, prosecution for drug offences has been declining (although the numbers are still high). This decline, however, has not been equal for all ethnic groups. The reduction has mostly affected white, “other”, and “mixed” groups, for each of them, the numbers have declined almost in half. On the other hand, for black and Asian people, these numbers have been reduced only by a third (Shiner et al., 2018, p. 43). These results suffice to prove that institutional racism extends not only to street work and arrests, but also prosecutorial areas of the legal system.
Given the fact that the measures taken to combat institutional racism have worked almost purely in favour of white people, a differing opinion has risen. It has been suggested that instead of focusing on ethnic minorities, authorities should prioritise implementing change within institutions (Byrne et al., 2020, p 231). It is possible that if the structure of the institution that perpetuates racism is fundamentally changed, the extend of racism will be diminished or abolished.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the issue of institutional racism continues to be prominent within the criminal justice system in England and Wales. Instances of racist behaviour permeate various levels of the judicial system, from searches to prosecutions. Other than the judicial system itself, racially-charged biases could influence the general public’s opinions through falsification of data. Reliable information regarding criminal activity could be sourced from self-report surveys or specifically commissioned reviews and reports. For example, according to these means of data mining, drug-related crimes are committed at a lower rate among BAME people. The rates of stop and search tactic, arrests, and prosecutions paint a different picture. People of colour and ethnic people are systematically subjected to stop and search and arrests more frequently than white people. The fact that some police higher-ups do not recognise or deny this issue does not add to the improvement of the situation. As a result of discoveries made through reviews and reports such as the Lammy Review and the Numbers in Black and White, several reforms have been introduced. Although the impacts of these reforms are apparent, there are still multiple disparities plaguing the justice system.
Reference List
Byrne, B., Alexander, C., Khan, O., Nazroo, J., & Shankley, W. (2020) Ethnicity, race and inequality in the UK: state of the nation. Bristol: Policy Press.
Shiner, M., Carre, Z., Delsol, R., & Eastwood, N. (2018) The colour of injustice: ‘race’, drugs and law enforcement in England and Wales. London: Stopwatch, LSE.