You can now be prosecuted and imprisoned for taking a photograph of a British bobby!
Incredible but true. From Monday, 16th February 2009 an amendment to the Terrorism Act 2000 made it a criminal offence to elicit or attempt to elicit, publish or communicate information, from amongst other persons, police constables. This carries with it imprisonment of up to 10 years plus the possibility of a fine.
Now, no one is suggesting that every time someone takes a snap which includes a policemen they're going to end up in dock.
But it does mean police officers can now arrest photographers if they do not like what they are photographing.
This latest example of a steady erosion of UK civil liberties, was introduced as part of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008.
Lawyers have warned that long with Section 58 of the 2000 Act, which covers collecting information "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism" - and that includes photographs - it is now possible to be arrested for taking a picture of a police officer in a public place.
Far fetch? Unlikely to happen? Sadly no – it has already begun.
Far fetch? Unlikely to happen? Sadly no – it has already begun.
Early indications of how the Police are likely to interpret these new powers became evident in January,
A London-based freelance photographer Justin Tallis was covering a demonstration against the BBC’s controversial refusal to broadcast a humanitarian appeal for aid for the people of Gaza following the Israeli invasion.
He took a photograph of the police constable who was on crowd control duty. The officer then demanded to see the picture but Tallis refused, insisting that as a press photographer on an assignment he had a legal right to take photographs of police officers on duty.
According a report in the British Journal of Photography the police officer tried to take the camera away and before giving up told Tallis that he 'shouldn't have taken that photo, you were intimidating me'. The incident was caught on camera by photojournalist Marc Vallee.
That was less than week after it was revealed how Cleveland Police stopped an amateur photographer taking pictures of ships. The photographer was asked if he had any terrorism connections then warned his details would be kept on file.
A month earlier, in December 2008, freelance press photographer Jess Hurd was detained by the police for more than 45 minutes while covering the wedding of a couple married in Docklands.
She was detained under section 44 of the Terrorism Act. Her camera was forcefully removed from her, and while she showed her press card, three police officers insisted on viewing the footage she had taken.
A London-based freelance photographer Justin Tallis was covering a demonstration against the BBC’s controversial refusal to broadcast a humanitarian appeal for aid for the people of Gaza following the Israeli invasion.
He took a photograph of the police constable who was on crowd control duty. The officer then demanded to see the picture but Tallis refused, insisting that as a press photographer on an assignment he had a legal right to take photographs of police officers on duty.
According a report in the British Journal of Photography the police officer tried to take the camera away and before giving up told Tallis that he 'shouldn't have taken that photo, you were intimidating me'. The incident was caught on camera by photojournalist Marc Vallee.
That was less than week after it was revealed how Cleveland Police stopped an amateur photographer taking pictures of ships. The photographer was asked if he had any terrorism connections then warned his details would be kept on file.
A month earlier, in December 2008, freelance press photographer Jess Hurd was detained by the police for more than 45 minutes while covering the wedding of a couple married in Docklands.
She was detained under section 44 of the Terrorism Act. Her camera was forcefully removed from her, and while she showed her press card, three police officers insisted on viewing the footage she had taken.
Big smile for the camera everyone!
RRL#6
ReplyDeleteI blogged about the same thing myself. The problem as i see it is that whilst we can agree that our civil liberties are being eroded bit by bit I cannot find anybody who can tell me who I should bite for in eithr the upcoming EU elections or next years general election. All parties seem to be in agreement when it comes to extending their power and reducingmy freedom.
ReplyDelete