Obstruction of a constable is a summary offence under section 89(2) of the Police Act 1996. It is committed where a person resists or wilfully obstructs a constable in the execution of their duty, or a person assisting a constable in the execution of their duty.
The offence is commonly called obstructing police, obstructing a police officer, or resisting a constable.
Legal Basis
Section 89(2) of the Police Act 1996 provides that a person who resists or wilfully obstructs a constable in the execution of their duty, or a person assisting a constable in the execution of their duty, commits an offence.
It is triable only summarily. CPS guidance states that the maximum sentence is one month's imprisonment and it is dealt with in the magistrates' court.
Obstruction
The Crown Prosecution Service says a person obstructs a constable if they prevent the officer from carrying out their duties or make it more difficult for them to do so.
The obstruction must be wilful. That means the act or omission must be deliberate and must obstruct an officer who is acting in the execution of their duty. The suspect does not need to use the legal word "obstruction" in their own mind, but must intend the state of affairs that amounts to obstruction.
Execution of Duty
The constable must be acting in the execution of duty. If an officer is acting outside lawful duty, the offence may not be made out. In practice, this can require close attention to the power being used, the facts known to the officer, and whether the officer's conduct was lawful.
This issue often appears in disputes about entry, search, arrest, seizure, traffic stops, and crowd-control situations.
Examples of Conduct
Conduct that may amount to obstruction includes:
- Physically blocking an officer who is carrying out a lawful duty.
- Warning someone that police are about to execute a lawful search.
- Giving false details in a way that materially hinders an investigation.
- Refusing lawful entry or hindering a lawful search.
- Interfering with an arrest or detention.
Rudeness, criticism, filming, asking questions, or disagreeing with police is not automatically obstruction. The issue is whether the conduct wilfully prevents or makes harder the carrying out of a lawful police duty.
Relationship With Other Offences
Obstruction under section 89(2) is less serious than perverting the course of justice. CPS guidance warns prosecutors to choose charges carefully, especially where false details or interference with an investigation are involved.
If the conduct includes violence, assaulting an emergency worker, assaulting a police officer, assault with intent to resist arrest, or a more serious violence offence may be considered.
Practical Examples
False Details
A person gives false details during a police inquiry and causes avoidable delay. Obstruction may be considered, although more serious public justice offences should not be used unless the facts justify them.
Filming Police
A person films officers from a distance without getting in their way. Filming alone is not obstruction. If the person repeatedly moves into an active search area and blocks officers, the analysis may change.
Warning About Search
A person knowingly warns someone that police are about to execute a lawful search, allowing evidence to be hidden. That may obstruct the officer's duty.
Unlawful Police Action
If police are not acting in lawful execution of duty, section 89(2) may not be made out. The legality of the police action can become a central issue.
See Also
- Police Act 1996
- Assault with Intent to Resist Arrest
- Citizen's Arrest
- Misconduct in Public Office
- Public Order Act 1986
References
Discussion log
Use comments for sourcing notes, corrections, and disputed details.
No comments yet.