Is it illegal to photograph police in Spain?

As FAR AS I KNOW and strictly speaking, yes. and they can order you to stop and maybe even delete photos. but like everything else it seems like these things are relative. a lot depends on the context it seems. local media do sometimes show images of police. my approach is pragmatic if I.m told not to I won.t there are enough people who are going to do it anyway. if an officer is in the photo then I consider the context, but I never go looking for photos of police and I always keep away from faces. in most cases such as a demo I would tend to pixel faces, keeping in mind context.

the question is whether a police officer is still a pc when they are acting outside their powers or reasonably believe they are doing so. the situation seems to be from a recent case -and without looking at the details- that a professional person is still to be accorded any professional rights even if a judges reasonably believes they are acting outside their profession. but don.t quote me on this.

Wais, I was on the metro when I posted my first comments.

Below are some links from some well known local media who have published clear images of police officers during the present disturbances in Valencia.

May I point out that just because these news papers have published these images it does not follow that it ok to take photos of the police. Proceed with caution must be the way to go.

Also don't forget that many Demotix photographers who are reporting these events are very experienced and know what they are doing; check out their past stories.

Maybe it might be a good idea to publish some guidelines on the matter for new comers to Demotix and who might not have had the time to check out the forum of safety issues.

Lawrence

Links:

Manifestación solidaria en Madrid con los estudiantes valencianos2
El País 21 FEB 2012 - 22:17 CET
http://ccaa.elpais.com/ccaa/imagenes/2012/02/21/album/1329855882_167760_1329858950_album_normal.jpg

PRIMAVERA VALENCIANA
La primavera valenciana vista por los lectores
Fecha de publicación 21/02/2012 - Actualizada a las
http://www.lavanguardia.com/galerias-fotos/20120221/54258164472/primavera-valenciana-fotos-lectores.html

Manifestación multitudinaria en Valencia
El País 21 FEB 2012 - 19:19 CET
http://ccaa.elpais.com/ccaa/imagenes/2012/02/21/album/1329839077_777897_1329842474_album_normal.jpg

SOCIEDAD | Cinco de los arrestados eran menores
La Policía detiene a 25 personas tras las últimas cargas contra los estudiantes en Valencia
http://estaticos.elmundo.es/albumes/2012/02/20/protestas_educacion_valencia/1329798707_extras_albumes_0.jpg

Hi, I'm one of the photographers covering Valencia disturbs.
As you can see in my pictures, I use to choose perspectives with no police faces. It's better for the picture quality don't have ugly pixels. But when I have a face that you can identify... I pixel it.
Why?
I started press pictures with 15M movement. I worked with no media, only for me. I had 6 retentions for identification in one and half month because I was with a camera. Police officers of anti riot unit didn't want to see their faces on internet, and they alleged their legal right about their self-image. So, I don't want problems working and they know about me (because anti riot unit and me usually go to the same place ), I thought it's better for both parts if I pixelize their faces and them let me work in peace.

That was until yesterday.
Me and other Demotix photographer were beaten by police (me on the leg and him on his photography bag), other journalist were beaten too, so we had to work in groups for protect us against police violence. Images can't explain what we lived yesterday, it was total war and police were charging against everyone they saw in front of them, including sometimes journalists with press pass. They used their shields to hit on the cameras when some photographers were taking pictures. We where threatened several times with things like "I don't mind that you're a journalist, if I see you again i'll hit you".

Now both of my local medias asked me to not pixelize their faces, because them consider that is not fair that the police face hitting a teenager is pixelized and the teenager face not. And they're totally right, and I'm very pissed with what happened in Valencia.
So... i'm not going to do it more. If you hit me don't think I'm gonna cover your face anymore.
If they have a problem they can discuss it with the paper that publish the pictures, not with me.

Hi, I'm one of the photographers covering Valencia disturbs.
As you can see in my pictures, I use to choose perspectives with no police faces. It's better for the picture quality don't have ugly pixels. But when I have a face that you can identify... I pixel it.
Why?
I started press pictures with 15M movement. I worked with no media, only for me. I had 6 retentions for identification in one and half month because I was with a camera. Police officers of anti riot unit didn't want to see their faces on internet, and they alleged their legal right about their self-image. So, I don't want problems working and they know about me (because anti riot unit and me usually go to the same place ), I thought it's better for both parts if I pixelize their faces and them let me work in peace.

That was until yesterday.
Me and other Demotix photographer were beaten by police (me on the leg and him on his photography bag), other journalist were beaten too, so we had to work in groups for protect us against police violence. Images can't explain what we lived yesterday, it was total war and police were charging against everyone they saw in front of them, including sometimes journalists with press pass. They used their shields to hit on the cameras when some photographers were taking pictures. We where threatened several times with things like "I don't mind that you're a journalist, if I see you again i'll hit you".

Now both of my local medias asked me to not pixelize their faces, because them consider that is not fair that the police face hitting a teenager is pixelized and the teenager face not. They're totally right, and I'm very pissed with what happened in Valencia.
So... i'm not going to do it more. If you hit me don't think I'm gonna cover your face anymore.
If they have a problem they can discuss it with the paper that publish the pictures, not with me.

About legality... If your using it for media, a police officer is an public employer in his work, so if you're covering a demonstration and in your picture appears one police face... sorry, but you have right to take it.
In fact, every citizien have the right to take pictures in the street. No matter who are in the picture. The self-image rights protect of the USE of the picture, not the FACT OF TAKE the picture. An them NEVER have the right to check or delete your pictures. If them ask u for ID you smile, give it and keep working when them give it back to you.

Yes, yes, police say "if you're not press you can't take the picture. Sorry but you can't photography my face". You know what? Is not true. You do have the right.
The diference is that if you're in press you have the right to publish in the papers your pictures of public interest, but if you're not and your amateur with a camera them can ask you to delete pictures from internet or demand you.

When you see pixels in media it's because good relationship because police and reporters, but if police hit reporters... enjoy your face in media.

That was until yesterday.
Me and other Demotix photographer were beaten by police (me on the leg and him on his photography bag), other journalist were beaten too, so we had to work in groups for protect us against police violence. Images can't explain what we lived yesterday, it was total war and police were charging against everyone they saw in front of them, including sometimes journalists with press pass. They used their shields to hit on the cameras when some photographers were taking pictures. We where threatened several times with things like "I don't mind that you're a journalist, if I see you again i'll hit you".

Now both of my local medias asked me to not pixelize their faces, they don't like pixelized faces on their newspaper so... i'm not going to do it more.
If they have a problem they can discuss it with the paper that publish the pictures, not with me.

About legality... If your using it for media, a police officer is an public employer in his work, so if you're covering a demonstration and in your picture appears one police face... sorry, but you have right to take it.
In fact, every citizien have the right to take pictures in the street. No matter who are in the picture. The self-image rights protect of the USE of the picture, not the FACT OF TAKE the picture. An them NEVER have the right to check or delete your pictures. If them ask u for ID you smile, give it and keep working when them give it back to you.

I collaborate with some newspapers, and them asked me to not pixelize faces anymore. Is their politic about it, so if police have a problem... discuss it with the media, not with me.

Yes, yes, police say "if you're not press you can't take the picture. Sorry but you can't photography my face". You know what? Is not true. You do have the right.
The diference is that if you're in press you have the right to publish in the papers your pictures of public interest, but if you're not and your amateur with a camera them can ask you to delete pictures from internet or demand you.

When you see pixels in media it's because good relationship because police and reporters, but if police hit reporters... enjoy your face in media.

Hello guys,

I think that it is fully legal.

The question of pixelating faces, is style book in the relationship between the police and the media. It is a recommendation, but if I'm not wrong, is not prohibited.
It is the result of years of terrorist acts throughout the state during the past 30 years.

Marc, bona feina!

Marc and ODS, It may be legal to photograph the police (in theory) by they will get you on some other spurious charge, such as disobeying an order, threatening them, obstruction or whatever.

When Marc writes: "I don't mind that you're a journalist, if I see you again i'll hit you", not to mention the issue why a well known TV station did not report that their own tv photographer was pushed by the police. we can safely assume that during these incidents there is no rule of law in street and might is right.

What must be remembered is that Spain is a very young democracy and issues can easily become political even if in reality they have nothing to do with politics, such as the present economic crisis. I mean, lets face it, we find these issues, even in "mature" democracies such as the UK, France, US and Canada (remember the G20??), what chance does a country like Spain or Greece for that matter have?

On wider debate, the question we have to ask ourselves is when is photography the best medium to hold the state to account and when it is not? The fact that the state threatens photographers like Marc (and other photographers in other democratic countries) suggests that the contagion is more serious that we want to believe.

best
Lawrence

You're totally right.

Marc/Lawrence,

I can't imagine what a chilling effect the threat of physical violence, or spurious arrest, could have on you and your colleagues. The self-censorship it results in can't be helpful for the long-term political health of Spain.

As Lawrence mentioned, in any democracy there is always situations where the police over-step their authority and the best interests of a democracy are threatened in the heat of the moment. However, the hope is always that sober second thought allows the constituents of the democracy to hold the abusers accountable.

The Canadian experience at the G20 was mentioned and it was critical that there were images available when that moment of sober second thought comes. (http://www.thestar.com/article/910306--police-officer-charged-in-g20-beating?bn=1)

Let's hope that the larger media outlets, with greater resources, stand up for their journalists and call the police to account for their abuses. In the long term this will only be more healthy for the Spanish democracy.

This may be a rough ride in the mean-time. Stay safe.

Victor

BTW,

I just did a quick search on police violence in Spain and see that there are some protests in Valencia planned regarding this: http://rt.com/news/spain-valencia-protests-violence-931/

Let's hope this is the beginning of something that takes root.

Victor

victor you sound optimistic! the problem isn .t only Spain. at least it is still national and international news when something like this happens- that.s not to say worst things don.t happen or this is not bad. I don.think that holding to account the few bad apples is going to happen anywhere in the world, never mind Spain. as you say events have to be reported.

The only way to bring change in a hurry is to publish actions, and faces. Without faces in the pictures there is no accountability, and deniability comes into play, but with faces in the pictures there is no out for those violating the laws.

The TV station is in a different position if the intend to bring legal charges against the police for violating their reporters rights, and assaulting him. The do not want to prejudice the case by publishing if they file charges.

There is never a time when faces should be blurred out if laws are being violated, even in countries that have laws against it. During the riots in Burma, after the Nagris typhoon, faces were shown, even though reporting was illegal without the material first being screened by the government press agency, and as a result, among other reportage in recent years, the government is changing. It is a slow change, but without picture, and video coverage showing faces there would never have been a need as the government sees it to change.

It all comes down to there being no deniability with pictures showing the actions with the faces of those violating laws, or human rights. The picture of the dead Monk floating down the river had dramatic effects on the government's actions during the riots, and lead to change.

@Steve, there is no doubt when you say, "There is never a time when faces should be blurred out if laws are being violated, even in countries that have laws against it....." In riot situations the police usually have helmets on so faces are not clear anyway. But if they want to identify the officer they can do it: re the Tomlinson case. The question is when the situation is not clear cut or, as you say if the case will be taken to court. Of course, pixeling faces is not the same as not having faces. However, pixeling does mean that in the original the face is clear and that this can be made available if and when needed.So the issue is not so much accountability, but having provided the evidence what's next?

best Lawrence