BRIGHTON, UNITED KINGDOM – 30.08.10. A police evidence bag with film shot by local man Glenn Williams of an anti-fascist protest. The film cassette was seized by police on the street under Section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 on Monday 30 August 2010 Brighton, England. Early in the day police clashed with around 200 anti-fascist campaigners as around 40 far-right nationalist protesters congregated under heavy police protection. Police used dogs and horses to clear anti-fascist protesters blocking streets in Brighton to stop the far right march. (Photo by Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2010. All rights reserved.

Link: Click here to view more pictures.

Audio: Police seize protesters film

On Monday I covered a protest in Brighton. I saw the police seize an anti-fascist protesters film cassette. The police used Section 19 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) 1984. What I found out is of great concern for photographers, journalists, media activists and especially New York fund managers.

Below is part of Section 19 of PACE:

(3) The constable may seize anything which is on the premises if he has reasonable grounds for believing —

(b) that it is necessary to seize it in order to prevent the evidence being concealed, lost, altered or destroyed.

So is it lawful for the police to seize media content from a member of the public on the street? It all comes down to the PACE definition of premises.

You can find that definition in Section 23.

The definition includes two very chilling words, “any place”.

I asked human rights lawyer Anna Mazzola from Hickman & Rose for her view on the use of Section 19 in a public order context.

“This episode reveals a worrying policy. Sussex police clearly think that Section 19 entitles them to remove film and footage from people where they suspect they have evidence of a crime and they can say that they have reason to believe the person may destroy that evidence. That is disturbing news for journalists and amateur photographers, particularly those covering public order events. While the police obviously have a duty to prevent and detect crime, they also have to provide some assurance that they will not use Section 19 to seize journalistic material.”

“The Media Show” – BBC Radio 4.

I was a guest on BBC Radio 4′s Media Show today which is hosted by Steve Hewlett.

“Earlier this month the government said police would need stronger grounds before stopping and searching photographers on suspicion of terrorism. While welcoming this repeal of s44 of the Terrorism Act, photographer Marc Vallée says he still has concerns about police conduct, which he puts to ACPO’s spokesman on this, Craig Mackey, Cumbria’s Chief Constable.”

You can also download a podcast of the show from here.

Poster.

“Victory Flashmob – Section 44 is Dead!” – londonphotographers.org

“Campaigners claim victory over Stop & Search ruling” – PhotographerNotaTerrorist.org

Looking forward to seeing you all tomorrow. First round is on the Met!

“Police use of protest photos will face review” – The Financial Times.

Here is a link to an article by Michael Peel, FT Legal Correspondent; James Boxell, FT Home Affairs Correspondent and yours truly in The Financial Times today on police surveillance. Do you want to know what a left-wing Labour MP, the deputy Prime Minister’s ‘interfaith and extremism’ adviser and maybe you have in common? If so then read on or pick up a copy.

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – 02.05.08. A civilian police photographer films and photographs working journalists outside City Hall on Friday 2 May 2008 in London, England. (Photo by Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2008.

Link.

“Journalists win payout after police admit failing to respect press freedom” – Paul Lewis, The Guardian.

“The Met’s apology to journalists is only of value if it acts upon it” – Olly Zanetti, The Guardian.

“Photographers win damages in Met Police legal case” – British Journal of Photography.

“Photographers win human rights victory over police” – Amateur Photographer.

“Police pay damages and apologise to photojournalists” – Press Gazette.

Here is the press round for the Greek Embassy case. Right, now back to work.

Link to PDF.

“Victory for NUJ members, human rights and press freedom” – nuj.org.uk

“Police pay damages to journalists for breaching their right to report” – bindmans.com

“A Victory for Press Freedom” – londonphotographers.org

Jason Parkinson and I have won our Greek Embassy case against the Metropolitan Police. This is a significant victory for press freedom.

Here is the police apology in full:

“On 8 December 2008 well-respected political journalists Marc Vallée and Jason Parkinson were reporting a protest outside the Greek Embassy, Holland Park, London. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) has accepted liability for breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The MPS apologise for this and have paid compensation. The MPS confirms its recognition that freedom of the press is a cornerstone of democracy and that journalists have a right to report freely. The MPS recognise that on 8 December 2008 they failed to respect press freedom in respect of Mr Vallée and Mr Parkinson.”

Click here for the full NUJ press release.

Past blog posts:

“Journalists launch civil action against police” – marcvallee.co.uk/blog

“Police to investigate Greek embassy incident” – marcvallee.co.uk/blog

“Video: Journalists obstructed at Greek Embassy protest” – marcvallee.co.uk/blog

“Can I have my lens hood back officer?” – marcvallee.co.uk/blog

“Speaking up for press freedom” – Marc Vallée, The Guardian.

Here is my Comment is free on last nights Hostile Reconnaissance – Terror Laws, Civil Liberties and Press Freedom rally organised by the London Photographers’ Branch of the National Union of Journalists.

Do we need a press freedom bill?

A legal definition of who is a journalist is problematic but both news gathering and journalism need legal protection.

For me a press freedom bill would not be about giving individual journalists more legal protection then any other citizen. What it could do is give the act of news gathering legal protection. The film footage by a New York fund manger of the attack on Ian Tomlinson at the G20 in London last year by a TSG police officer was a very important act of news gathering by a member of the public who was not a journalist.

In the hands of Paul Lewis and The Guardian that film footage become journalism. The police did visit The Guardian office to put pressure on The Guardian to remove the film from its website. Thankfully The Guardian stood up to this pressure. Legal protection in that context would be a step forward.

We have a common law right to take a picture in a public place. Court rulings over privacy, counterterrorism laws and police action threaten that common law right. I would like that right to be protected for all.

Updated: 15.04.10.

“Hostile Reconnaissance – Terror Laws, Civil Liberties & Press Freedom” – London Photographers’ Branch of the NUJ.

I’m one of the speakers at the London Photographers’ Branch pre-election rally next week along with Jeremy Dear, General Secretary National Union of Journalists; Paul Lewis, Guardian journalist & British Press Awards Reporter of the Year 2010; Keith Ewing, Professor of Public Law at King’s College London & author of Bonfire of the Liberties; Henry Porter, Observer columnist, author & London editor of Vanity Fair and Chez Cotton, Head of Action Against the Police at Bindmans Solicitors & a co-ordinator of the Police Action Lawyers Group.

Hostile Reconnaissance: Terror Laws, Civil Liberties & Press Freedom at 7pm on the 13th of April at Friends Meeting House in Euston.

Click here for more information.

“Hostile Reconnaissance – Terror Laws, Civil Liberties & Press Freedom” – London Photographers’ Branch of the NUJ.

The London Photographers’ Branch of the NUJ is holding a pre-election rally on Terror Laws, Civil Liberties & Press Freedom at 7pm on the 13th of April at Friends Meeting House in Euston.

Click here for more information.

STOP & SEARCH ONE: Philip Caller being stopped & searched under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) at 7.50am on Sunday 7 February 2010 in London, England. Photo by Philip Caller. (c) Philip Caller, 2010. Published here by kind permission of Philip Caller.

“Photographer stopped and searched three times during Israeli goods protest” – journalism.co.uk

“Journalists angry at ‘stop and search’ harassment” – National Union of Journalists.

On Sunday I got a phone call from London Photographers’ Branch member Philip Caller. Philip told me he had just been stopped & searched 3 times in 45 minutes by the police on a job covering a protest in west London. Philip had been stopped and searched under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) and here are the pictures.

Yesterday the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) issued a statement on this. This is what Roy Mincoff the NUJ legal officer had to say:

“This is an example of straightforward harassment which is totally unacceptable in a country which presumes to lecture other regimes on freedom of expression. While we receive assurances from senior police officers and politicians that reporters and photographers will not face interference when carrying out their legitimate work, it is clear that the instructions to junior ranks are still not getting through to all officers.

STOP & SEARCH TWO: Philip Caller being stopped & searched under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) at 8.15am on Sunday 7 February 2010 in London, England. Photo by Philip Caller. (c) Philip Caller, 2010. Published here by kind permission of Philip Caller.

STOP & SEARCH THREE: Philip Caller being stopped & searched under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) at 8.35am on Sunday 7 February 2010 in London, England. Photo by Philip Caller. (c) Philip Caller, 2010. Published here by kind permission of Philip Caller.