Leader: Half-hearted police apology unhelpful

OUR police do a difficult job under difficult circumstances. We ask a lot of the forces of law and order, expecting them to deal with everything from crimes such as burglarly to combating drugs gangs and preventing terrorism. But from time to time the police get it wrong, as Lothian and Borders did in the case of a protestor detained by officers in May 2008 for refusing to give his name. Only now, after a ruling by the police complaints commissioner, has the force apologised.

On the face of it, the correct response. No matter who you are, if you make a mistake you should apologise, and those who apply the law must be prepared to admit it if they err in law. However, a close reading of the apology reveals it is rather half-hearted. The Deputy Chief Constable of the force admits his officers misinterpreted the law but adds he was satisfied that “in the circumstances” the officers would have been “justified” in arresting the protestor.

This is not good enough and will add to public mistrust of the police fuelled by the recent heavy-handed attempt by the Metropolitan Police to use the Official Secrets Act to force the Guardian to disclose information about its phone hacking investigations. Whether it is Lothian and Borders, or the Met, the police must remember the law is not there to be used against people who simply annoy them, like activists on a protest, for example, or those who embarrass them, like journalists. Their primary responsibility is the protection of the public. Within the law.