Well there are 170+ signed up now but my MP is sadly lacking. All I got was the standard 'we have received your enquiry' type of letter.
Tim - is your second letter also from your MP or is it actually from the Home Office? A Home Office letter would carry a lot more weight with police or security than an MP's letter.
Steve.
As promised, attached is the Home Office letter - redacted to remove my name/address, but otherwise unchanged. I suggest a highlighter pen to the second paragraph if needed, though ;-).
(Incidentally, for anyone who may be wondering - "West of Spithead" is not an instruction on where to stick the letter; that's Baron West of Spithead's signature - he is the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Security & Counter-terrorism in the Home Office.)
I wrote to my MP to draw his attention to the EDM. He replied very promptly and here's what he said:
Thank you for your email about EDM 1155 and photography in public places.
I appreciate you drawing my attention to this issue, I am not aware that this practice is particularly prevalent, and as such I would not wish to sign the EDM and criticise our police force without knowing more details.
Around two hundred, mostly professional, photographers gather at the headquarters of the Metropolitain Police, New Scotland Yard, in Central London, on 16 February 2009. They joined together to protest against new proposed legislation that makes it an offence to photograph police officers or military personnel if the picture could be used for a purpose linked to terrorism.
They are angry at the introduction of Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act and argue it can be used by police to stop and search them in any situation. Anyone convicted under Section 76 could face a fine or a maximum of 10 years' imprisonment. The demonstration has been organised by the National Union of Journalists.
From the news:
This is not a law preventing the taking a photograph of a police officer it's a law preventing the taking a photograph of a police officer which is likely to be of use to a person planning an act of terrorism. Just taking a photograph of a police officer without the terrorist intent is still legal - as it should be.
I can't see this law ever being tried in court for these reasons:
1. If there is sufficient evidence of terrorist intent then there is evidence for convictions for much more serious 'crimes' than photography so they will not bother with the 'crime' of photography.
2. If there is no evidence of terrorist intent then they don't have a case. If a photographer gets wrongfully arrested under this law he will eventually be released with an apology - as has been the case in most recent similar situations.
3. This one is highly unlikely but if they decide to persue a case in court over an amateur (or press) photographer taking such a picture, that picture will be court evidence and the prosecution will have to show how that picture will be of assistance to a terrorist.
I can see that this law when misused could be a major hassle when incorrectly quoted by police officers and PCSOs, as has the current terrorism act and proper training of officers is needed to ensure innocent photographers are not caught up in it.
This law will never see a non-terrorist photographer imprisoned. It has potential for imprisoning a photographer with a terrorist intent but that intent is already illegal anyway so it is a pointless addition to the law.
Steve.
P.S. As I understand, there is no law against the taking of pictures in any public place, i.e. if it's being done by someone in the street or in public it can be photographed, drawn or painted whatever it is. However, it is not necessarily so if the the subject is on private land and the photographer is on the street. The complex copyright laws then come to bear. The problem, in the main, seems to be over zealous officials.
I just have one question: what is the purpose of laws such as this one?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?