Consultation on the review of the Stop and Search of Persons in Scotland Code of Practice for Constables: analysis of responses

11. General feedback (Q19, Q20)

11.1 This chapter reports on responses provided to questions 19 and 20 of the consultation, which allowed respondents to provide any general feedback they have to the Code, whether they think anything should be added, changed, or removed. Question 19 is a closed question, requiring respondents to answer ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘Don’t know’, while question 20 allowed respondents to submit any further feedback they have on this subject.

Question 19: Is there anything in the revised Code that should be added, changed or removed?

Question 20: Please provide any further comments about the Code.

11.2 The below sections look at the responses to each of these questions in turn.

Question 19: Is there anything in the revised Code that should be added, changed or removed?

11.3 This closed question asked respondents to answer ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘Don’t know’ as to whether there is anything in the Code that should be added, changed or removed.

11.4 This question received a total of 23 responses. 65% of the responses to this question were submitted by organisations, with the remaining 35% provided by individual respondents. Responses indicated that many respondents considered that some amendment to the Code was required, with 70% of respondents answering ‘Yes’ suggesting something needs to be amended. Of the remaining respondents, 30% answered ‘No’, and no respondents to this question answered ‘Don’t know’. For the respondents who answered ‘Yes’, it was made up of 63% organisations and 38% individuals. Of the respondents who answered ‘No’ to this question, this was made up of 71% organisations and 29% individuals.

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

Question 20: Please provide any further comments about the Code.

11.5 This open question provided an opportunity for respondents to expand on their answer to the previous question, offering feedback or concerns on where they believe the revised Code could be strengthened through amendments. There were 17 respondents to this question, 59% of them came from organisations, with the remaining 41% from individuals.

Percentages may not total 100% due to rounding.

11.6 Overall, responses reiterated themes raised throughout the consultation, with respondents highlighting areas where the revised Code could be strengthened to improve clarity, consistency and the protection of individual rights.

Sex and gender

11.7 A number of respondents provided further comments on the revised Code’s treatment of sex and gender. Feedback reflected ongoing concerns about the need for clearer and more consistent guidance, particularly in relation to establishing sex for the purposes of a search and ensuring clarity in same‑sex searching requirements.

11.8 Some respondents called for a more clearly defined, sex‑based approach to support legal certainty and protect dignity and privacy, particularly in relation to more intrusive searches. There were also suggestions that relevant provisions could be revised to improve clarity and ensure consistent application in practice.

Equalities and human rights

11.9 Respondents highlighted the importance of ensuring that the revised Code continues to balance effective policing with the protection of individual rights. Feedback emphasised the need for clear guidance on principles such as proportionality and non‑discrimination, alongside robust mechanisms for monitoring and review.

11.10 Some respondents also raised broader considerations relating to future developments in policing, noting the importance of ensuring that emerging practices and technologies remain subject to appropriate safeguards and oversight.

Children and young people

11.11 In relation to children and young people, respondents reiterated the need for stronger safeguards and clearer guidance. This included suggestions to enhance the Code’s alignment with relevant legislation and policy, as well as to ensure that children’s rights are fully reflected in both practice and oversight.

11.12 Some respondents also emphasised the importance of incorporating the views and experiences of children and young people into the monitoring and review of stop and search practices.

Operational practice and use of powers

11.13 Feedback was also received on the practical use of stop and search powers. Respondents highlighted the need to ensure that powers are exercised proportionately and do not extend beyond their intended purpose. Suggestion included providing greater clarity on where and how searches should be conducted, including consideration of privacy and the circumstances in which alternative locations may be appropriate.

Accessibility and communication

11.14 Respondents highlighted the need to strengthen accessibility and communication throughout the revised Code. This included calls for clearer guidance on supporting individuals with additional needs, the use of appropriate and inclusive language, and the provision of accessible materials.

11.15 There were also suggestions to ensure that officers proactively identify and respond to support needs, and that guidance reflects best practice in engaging with individuals who may require additional assistance.