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.

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – 24.07.08. New Scotland Yard the Headquarters of the Metropolitan Police, London, England on Thursday 24th July 2008. The Metropolitan Police have come under increasing pressure from National Union of Journalists due to numerous complaints about how the police deal with the media, particularly at public events and demonstrations. (Photo by Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2008.

Media Event: “I’m a Photographer … not a Terrorist”

Hosted by the National Union of Journalists and supported by the British Journal of Photography and the British Press Photographers’ Association.

New Scotland Yard, Broadway, Westminster, London SW1H, UK.  (Map)

Monday 16 February 2009.

11am.

“NUJ, activists and BJP calls for photography rights event” - British Journal of Photography.

Monday 16th February 2009 is the enforcement date for Section 76  of the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008.   As the British Journal of Photography (BJP) wrote last month,

“The relationship between photographers and police could worsen next month when new laws are introduced that allow for the arrest – and imprisonment – of anyone who takes pictures of officers ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’.”

To read the full BJP article, click here.

So with that the National Union of Journalists has teamed up with Mark Thomas (writer, broadcaster, comic and political activist), Chris Atkins (the BAFTA nominated director and writer of the feature film documentary Taking Liberties), Marc Vallée (Photojournalist – that’s me by the way), The British Journal of Photography and many more  for a “media event” outside New Scotland Yard on Monday 16 February 2009 at 11am.

The plan is simple, turn up with your camera and exercise your democratic right to take a photograph in a public place.

Here is a link to a Fackbook page for the event.   Please note that this event is NOT a Protest! It’s just photography!

See you on the 16th folks!

Update – 06.02.09: NUJ Media Release:

“Photographers snap into action over new law” – National Union of Journalists.

“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.”

Click here to read more.

KINGSNORTH, KENT, UNITED KINGDOM – 05.8.08. Police stop and search Jason N. Parkinson, Video & Print Journalist,  outside the main gates of the Camp for Climate Action Kingsnorth, Kent, England on Tuesday 5th August 2008.  Published here by kind permission of Jess Hurd/reportdigital.co.uk. (c) Jess Hurd, 2008.

“Covering Climate Camp: Part One” – Current TV.

“Covering Climate Camp: Part Two” – Current TV.

My good friend and colleague Jason N. Parkinson has made a film about journalists covering Climate Camp in Kent last summer.  Click on the links above to watch the film and this is what Jason had to say about the film.

“In August 2008, environmental protestors set up camp in Kent, England, to protest the current and newly proposed E-On coal-fired power stations at Kingsnorth.   Part one of the film documents not the protest movement, but the journalists trying to cover the story for independent and mainstream news organisations.

“In some of the worst scenes of police interference the press were subjected to stop-and-search, harassment, aggression and violence, which led to the National Union of Journalists and the industry media publically slamming the police on the grounds of press freedom restriction.

“In Part Two of two of the film the policing gets heavier, journalists trying to cover the story for independent and mainstream news organisations face surveillance, harassment, endless stop-and-searches and assault – they are even followed by a police unit to a McDonald’s restaurant.”

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – 24.01.09. A Metropolitan Police Forward Intelligence Team sergeant grabs hold of a press photographer’s camera on a Gaza protest against the BBC on Saturday 24th January 2009 in London, England. Justin Tallis, a London based freelance photographer and NUJ and BPPA member, was photographing the anti-BBC protest. The BBC had refused to broadcast a charity appeal to raise emergency funds for people in the Gaza Strip. (Photo by Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2009.

“Another press photographer threatened by police” - British Journal of Photography.

Images: “Surveillance Police grab Press Photographers Camera on Gaza anti-BBC Protest – 24.01.09″

Justin Tallis tells us what happened in his own words,

The police officer said “let me have a look at that picture.” I said, “No”.  The police officer then said, “You’re not allowed to take photos of police officers”.  I then said, “Don’t be ridiculous of course I can take pictures of police officers”. The police officer then tried to take my camera from me.   After a bit of time I think the police officer realised he was in the wrong trying to forcibly take my equipment from me.  He then got very close to me, way into my personal space, and said again “you shouldn’t have taken that photo you were intimidating me”. I think that if Marc had not been there taking these photos the situation could have ended very differently.

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM – 05.07.08. A Metropolitan Police Inspector grabs hold of a working journalists as police clash with a group of anti-G8 activists in Croydon, south London, England on Saturday 5th July 2008. Protesters congregated to protest against the UK Border Agency in Croydon as part of a world wide day of action against the G8 Summit in Sapporo, Hokkaido, Japan. (Photo by Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2008.

“Home Office clarifies street photography bans” - British Journal of Photography.

Vernon Coaker, the Minister for Security, Counter-terrorism, Crime and Policing in a letter to Jeremy Dear, general secretary of the National Union of Journalists dated 03 December 2008 has confirmed that photography can be “limited” in public places in “special circumstances”:

‘This may be on the grounds of national security or there may be situations in which the taking of photographs may cause or lead to public order situations or inflame an already tense situation or raise security considerations. Additionally, the police may require a person to move on in order to prevent a breach of the peace or to avoid a public order situation or for the person’s own safety and welfare or for the safety and welfare of others’.

Did Vernon Coaker just make me redundant? More on this over the next few days.

TEARSHEET: Jess Hurd’s center page pictures in The Guardian on Saturday 13 December 2008.  Later on she was detained under the Terrorism Act.  Published here by kind permission of Jess Hurd/reportdigital.co.uk. (c) Jess Hurd, 2008.

“Terrorism Act cited over wedding photos” - pressgazette.co.uk

“Photographer mulls legal action” -  AP

“UPDATE: Audio of altercation between police officers and press photographer emerges” – British Journal of Photography

“Press photographer detained under Terrorism Act” -British Journal of Photography.

“Photographer at wedding accused of taking pictures for terrorists”- National Union of Journalists.

“Traveller wedding belles go to town – in the shadow of mass eviction” – The Guardian.

Audio: Jess Hurd – Stop and Search – S44  Terrorism Act.

My good friend and colleague Jess Hurd (who over the weekend attended the European Federation of Journalists event “Photojournalists: An endangered species in Europe?” in Paris) was stopped and searched last week on UN Human Rights Day under the S44 of the Terrorism Act by police.  The officers “forcibly took” her camera which under S44 there do not have the power to do so.

Click here to  listen to an audio file of the stop and  search and below is the full statement from National Union of Journalists (NUJ).

NUJ Statement:

“A photographer documenting the persecution of Irish travellers in the UK was herself subjected to police intimidation…on UN Human Rights Day.

“The NUJ has condemned the abuse of the police’s stop and search powers after they forcibly took photographer Jess Hurd’s camera from her and detained her for 45 minutes under S44 of the Terrorism Act whilst she was covering a traveller wedding in London Docklands, part of a long term documentary project on the persecution of travellers.

“Whilst clearly photographing a wedding, the pictures of which appeared in Saturday’s Guardian newspaper, Jess was detained under s44 on the grounds she could be carrying out hostile reconnaissance for a terrorist assault.”

NUJ General Secretary Jeremy Dear said: “This is yet another absurd misuse of the s44 powers which are designed to allow the police to detain those actively involved in carrying out a terrorist activity not to stop press photographers carrying out their legitimate business.

“Despite the government’s warm words about the right to photograph in public and new Home Office guidelines it appears the routine abuse of these powers goes on.

“How ironic that those documenting persecution and intimidation on UN Human Rights Day should be subject to such abuse and intimidation”.

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM. Irish travellers Nora Quilligan and Danny Sheridan from Dale Farm celebrate their wedding day.  This was the third of four weddings held in quick succession by families at Dale Farm anxious to solemnize marriages before the New Year when Court of Appeal judges may rule that Basildon council can put into action its much delayed eviction operation.  Published here by kind permission of Jess Hurd/reportdigital.co.uk. (c) Jess Hurd, 2008.

KINGSNORTH, KENT, UNITED KINGDOM – 09.8.08. A press photographer files images on the move as environmental activists march from the Camp for Climate Action to Kingsnorth Power Station Hoo, Kent, England on Saturday 9th August 2008. 2,000 campaigners marched on the Power Station with the aim to shut it down for the day. (Photo Marc Vallée/marcvallee.co.uk) (c) Marc Vallée, 2008.

“New terror guidelines on photography” – theregister.co.uk

“Police agency releases stop-and-search practice advice” – British Journal of Photography.

“Stop-and-search: new guidance for police treatment of photographers” – blogs.journalism.co.uk

“Police agency clarifies Terrorism Act statement” - British Journal of Photography.

The National Policing Improvement Agency (NPIA) has today released its updated Practice Advice on stop-and-search powers in relation to the Terrorism Act of 2000 (PDF).  The Advice includes guidelines for police officers on how to deal with photographers. The guidance has been circulated to forces for final comment and following consultation it will require formal endorsement by Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) when it meets in the next couple of weeks.

Here is the Advice on photogarphy:

“The Terrorism Act 2000 does not prohibit people from taking photographs or digital images in an area where an authority under section 44 is in place.  Officers should not prevent people taking photographs unless they are in an area where photography is prevented by other legislation.

“If officers reasonably suspect that photographs are being taken as part of hostile terrorist reconnaissance, a search under section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or an arrest should be considered. Film and memory cards may be seized as part of the search, but officers do not have a legal power to delete images or destroy film.   Although images may be viewed as part of a search, to preserve evidence when cameras or other devices are seized, officers should not normally attempt to examine them.  Cameras and other devices should be left in the state they were found and forwarded to appropriately trained staff for forensic examination.  The person being searched should never be asked or allowed to turn the device on or off because of the danger of evidence being lost or damaged.”

“Film and memory cards may be seized as part of the search” and “images may be viewed as part of a search” What is going on here?  Does Section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 override the long held journalistic protection of Special Procedure Material under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE)?   As an article on the EPUK website put it last year:  “Under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, material such as a journalist’s notes, photographs, computer files or tapes are classified as Special Procedure Material, which have a higher level of protection than ordinary possessions.”

Which means if the police want to look at such material then they would have to go in front of a judge and explain why.

I have been on to the NPIA press office and the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) press office about this as I’m writing an article for journalism.co.uk on terror law and photogarphy.  When I get a reponse I will post them up on here as well.

Updated at 1.20pm:

Roy Mincoff, NUJ Legal Officer said:

“We welcome the publication of unequivocal guidance showing that the Terrorism Act does not prohibit the taking of photographs in public places.

“The authorities must now ensure that police officers are aware of the limits to their powers. It must also be made crystal clear that the right to seize film and memory cards can only be used in the very exceptional circumstances where there are strong grounds for suspecting someone of being a terrorist.

“If section 43 of the Act ends up being casually used by officers in the same slapdash manner as other parts of the legislation, it would seriously inhibit the ability of journalists to work in our cities. The police cannot routinely use anti-terror or other legislation to stop journalists in their lawful and proper work. Neither must they see these guidelines as a green light to seize journalistic material, the special nature of which is recognised by law.

“We will also be looking carefully at other aspects of the guidelines to assess other possible effects on civil liberties and the free press.”

Updated at 6.30pm:

An NPIA spokesperson said:

“There has been no change to the law.  These guidelines remind officers that they can only stop and search photographers in exceptional cases where they believe they are involved in some kind of terrorist information gathering activity.”

After asking more questions I got this from the NPIA :

“The Practice Advice makes it clear that there has been no change in the law.  Journalist material will continue to enjoy the higher level of protection offered under PACE.

“For example, if a police officer suspects that photographs are being taken as part of terrorist information gathering they will rightly investigate.  But once the stopped person makes it clear that they are a journalist then this will usually reassure police that they have legitimate reasons for taking photographs.”

Source: Practice Advice on Stop and Search in Relation to Terrorism 2008 (PDF). Produced on behalf of the Association of Chief Police Officers by the National Policing Improvement Agency.