When identifying procedure may be done
40 When identifying procedure may be done
If —
under section 37 a request is made to a suspect or under section 38 to a responsible person; and
the suspect or responsible person is informed in accordance with section 37 or 38, as the case requires; and
as the case requires, either —
the suspect, if an adult, consents to the identifying procedure; or
the responsible person consents to the identifying procedure being done on the suspect who is a protected person,
then the identifying procedure may be done on the suspect.
If a suspect who is an adult, having been —
requested under section 37 to consent to an identifying procedure; and
informed under that section,
does not consent or withdraws consent to the procedure, the procedure may only be done on the suspect if —
in the case of a non‑intimate identifying procedure — a senior officer approves it under section 44; or
in the case of an intimate identifying procedure — a JP issues an IP warrant (suspect) that authorises it.
If a responsible person, having been —
requested under section 38 to consent to an identifying procedure being done on a suspect who is a protected person; and
informed under that section,
does not consent or withdraws consent to the procedure, the procedure may only be done on the suspect if a magistrate issues an IP warrant (suspect) that authorises it.
If a suspect is a protected person and, after making reasonable enquiries to find a responsible person, an officer reasonably suspects that —
there is no responsible person; or
a responsible person cannot be found within a reasonable time; or
it is impracticable to request the consent of a responsible person,
an identifying procedure may only be done on the suspect if a magistrate issues an IP warrant (suspect) that authorises it.
[Section 40 amended: No. 22 of 2013 s. 16.]
The statute text is free to read above. View Pro plans to unlock the case-law research tools for each provision.