Schools are advised to get parents' consent before using dogs

And pupils whose parents have not agreed to sniffer dog checks should be allowed to leave during searches.

Such searches should not be used solely for deterrent impact, head teachers in England have been told.

If there are no reasonable grounds for suspicion, heads are told they could be challenged under the Human Rights Act.

Search warrant

The Prime Minister, Tony Blair, caused a stir when he talked in an interview with the News of the World newspaper about guidance to be issued to head teachers next month on how to tackle pupils they suspect of drug taking.

"If heads believe they have a problem in their school then they should be able to do random drug testing," he said.

"Guidance will be given to head teachers next month which is going to give them specifically the power to do random drug testing within their schools."

In fact the guidance has been published already. It is on the education department's Teachernet website.

A spokesperson explained that it had not yet been "issued" in the sense of being sent out to schools.

The guidance says some schools have "adopted further strategies such as urine-testing or requesting police handlers or private companies with sniffer dogs" to try to detect illegal drugs.

There is no mention of "random" tests as such. Instead it stresses that schools should involve the police and get a search warrant before conducting a dog search.

They are advised to make sure, in advance, that parents have given their consent, usually in writing - and that children for whom consent has not been given are removed.

A spokesperson for the Department for Education explained that, provided tests had been agreed in advance in the school's overall drug policy, they could then be random.

Search warnings

"Schools must not search personal property without consent," the guidance says.

"If the school wishes to search personal property, including pupils' property stored within school property, for example a bag or pencil case within a locker, they should ask for consent."

Where consent is refused they will need to consider notifying parents "who may persuade their child to give consent or if they wish to proceed along formal lines calling the police" [sic].

Staff are warned it is "not appropriate" for them to carry out a personal search, including searching clothing and inside pockets.

"Every effort should be made to persuade the person to hand over voluntarily any drugs, in the presence of a second adult witness."

"Where the individual refuses and the drug is believed to be illegal, and the school wishes to proceed along formal lines, then the police must be called."

The guidance says it is essential that before a school does a dog search, it should consider very carefully whether the action:

• is consistent with the pastoral responsibility of the school to create a supportive environment
• is culturally insensitive - "for example, dogs are considered unclean in Muslim and Buddhist cultures"
• will lead to labelling and be damaging to pupils concerned
• will result in appropriate support for pupils most in need
• is feasible and an effective use of school resources, and those of the police, where involved.

Searches to detect drugs should be a clear part of an overall drug policy developed "in consultation with pupils, parents, staff, governors and the whole school community".

And parents should "have given their consent (usually in writing) to the proposed use of sniffer dogs at the request of the head teacher".

It says this is "good practice rather than a legal requirement".

Schools should see that "procedures are in place to remove pupils for whom consent is not given".

Children's rights campaigners and even a former chief constable have questioned the viability and legality of carrying out drug searches.