The Channel 4 news presenter tells liberty central why we need to debate issues from ID cards to the right to protest.
VIEW THE VIDEO at:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/video/2009/jan/23/liberty-central-jon-snow-civil-liberties
A letter sent in to The Guardian recently, I don't think there is anything to add really - just read the letter and decide for yourself whether you think this is reasonable in a 'Free Society' or more typical of a police state.
I have recently agreed to take on a pub in a residential part of Islington. Under normal circumstances this would have simply involved the existing licence holder signing over the premises' licence to me. Unfortunately they had gone insolvent and disappeared so I applied for a new licence, which requires the approval of a number of organisations, including the police. I was stunned to find the police were prepared to approve, ie not fight, our licence on condition that we installed CCTV capturing the head and shoulders of everyone coming into the pub, to be made available to them upon request. There was no way that they could have imposed this on the previous licence holder.
As it happens the Islington Labour party headquarters is on the same street as the pub and, being a member, I contacted the MP Emily Thornberry to see if she really thinks she needs her photo taken when she pops in for a pint - needless to say I have not heard from her. I also spoke with a friend who is the licensing officer for another borough. Not only did he tell me that there was nothing I could do to overturn this, he also strongly advised me not to blot my copybook with the police by even questioning the request; I would not want them against me in the future, he said.
I have been spitting teeth in a silent rage since I first heard of this request, but at every turn I am alternately advised to keep my head down or laughed at for my naivety for thinking that the world was ever not thus. When was it that the constant small erosion of our liberties became irreversible?
Nick Gibson
London
READ MORE at:-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/feb/11/police-surveillance-cctv-pubs
The awful and unnecessary Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 is creeping into force, having been partially commenced by the rubber stamping of this Order:
The War on Photographers , and Military Historians and Biographers etc. intensifies, by making it a serious terrorist crime to "attempt to elicit" information e.g. name, address, photograph etc.,about a current or former member of the Police, Armed Forces or Intelligence Services.
It does not matter if there is a legal defence available to you in Court, it is too late for your liberty and career, once you have been tainted and blacklisted, by being arrested under a terrorism law, even if you are never charged or are found not guilty.
How soon before this law is used to threaten, harass and arrest political demonstrators or activists, who take photos of the Police etc. who are taking photos of them ?
READ MORE at:-
Comedian Mark Thomas is to join with NUJ members in an event to highlight the threat of a new UK law that could be used against press photographers taking pictures of the police.
The Counter Terrorism Act allows for the arrest and imprisonment of anyone whose pictures are "likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism".
The union is joining with campaigners to organise a mass picture taking session outside London's police HQ on Monday 16 February - the day the act becomes law.
In theory, this act now makes it illegal to take photos of any of the following:-It was the roses that got me into trouble.
I had gone to talk to the owner of the greenhouses for an environmental story I have been working on.
By the time I realised I had broken the law, it was too late.
My crime was not just to be within the town - to be honest, I did not realise I was, because the greenhouses were well outside the built-up area - but to be a foreigner within the town.
This story by the BBC tells the tale of a journalist who entered the administrative area of a town which foreigners were not allowed to enter, the event happened in Russia, in a town where military submarines are housed."A secret police intelligence unit has been set up to spy on leftwing and rightwing political groups," said the story in the Mail on Sunday. Who has decided that political and environmental groups consisting of individuals, who are guaranteed the rights of demonstration, association, free speech and privacy under the Human Rights Act, should be spied upon by this new sinister police unit?
The answer is the Association of Chief Police Officers – and that is the problem.
Few understand that ACPO is a private company, which happens to be funded by a Home Office grant and money from 44 police authorities. But despite its important role in drafting and implementing policies that affect the fundamental freedoms of this country, ACPO is protected from freedom of information requests and its proceedings remain largely hidden from public view. In reality ACPO is no more troubled by public scrutiny than the freemasons.
Now the police have set up the confidential intelligence unit to monitor the political life of this nation. The only reason we know of this is because the Mail on Sunday followed up an internal police job advertisement for the head of the confidential intelligence unit, who would work closely with government departments, university authorities and private sector companies "to remove the threat of criminality and public disorder that arises from domestic extremism". The story tells us that the CIU will also prevent details of its operations being made public.
This surely must ring a few alarm bells, even among our complacent MPs who have allowed this tiny state-within-a-state to flourish over the past decade. It is evident that the CIU will not be troubled by any public accountability and that the individual who becomes its head will be able to make decisions unilaterally about the nation's politics. If all environmental groups are to be branded extreme, if those who demonstrate against the invasion of Gaza are, as a matter of course, to be regarded as a criminal threat, we will enter a period of enormous tension between the authorities and those people who wish to exercise their legitimate right to demonstrate.
Posts
All Comments
