Photographers Not Terrorists

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act. London, UK. 23/01/2010

Well over a thousand photographers gathered in Trafalgar Square, London today, Saturday 23 Jan, 2010, to protest at the harassment of people taking photographs by police, and in particular their abuse of powers under the Terrorism Act.

Increasingly both professional photographers working on the streets and amateurs taking pictures have been approached by police, questioned and then subjected to a search, usually under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (S44.)

These stop and searches appear to have continued unabated despite a Home Office Circular in September that made it clear they should not be used to target photographers. Searches can also be carried out under Section 43 of the act, but for this officers must have reasonable grounds to suspect someone of being a terrorist. S44 stops can only be carried out in "authorised areas", which although intended by Parliament to apply in very restricted areas for short lengths of time have been used by police - for example - to permanently to cover central London and some other areas.

Working photojournalists continue to be searched even though they may show a Press card that states on it "The Association of Chief Police Officers of England Wales and Northern Ireland and the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland recognise the holder of this card as a bona-fide newsgatherer."

One of my colleagues who carries such a card was the subject of roughly 30 searches in 2009. It is hard not to reach the conclusion that at least at times the police have used S44 as a way of harassing photographers.

The government is currently preparing an appeal against a European Court Human Rights ruling that the stops and searches conducted under Section 44 are a breach of human rights and thus illegal.

A BBC News reporter, standing in the middle of a crowd of experienced journalists used to recording large events was howled down after giving a report in which he gave the number attending the protest as "three hundred." Clearly there were well over a thousand taking part - my own estimate was around 1500, although I heard larger figures given. It was not a good advertisement for the competence or impartiality of the BBC who appear to have a policy of playing down dissent; their reported numbers for other events I have attended have also at times been laughably low.

As well as over a thousand people of all ages taking pictures, the event was also enlivened by several pieces of street theatre, including the Vigilance Committee with a man on stilts wearing a number of CCTV cameras accompanied by a male and female vigilance officer, who picked on individuals and questioned them, taking their fingerprints before finding them guilty and sentencing them to a choice of six years hard labour or contributing to the Vigilance Committee. Three Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence also came along and added a little colour (or pallor) to the event.

As for the police themselves, and the "heritage wardens" who usually patrol the square (and at times tell people they are not allowed to take photographs) they were in hiding today - though doubtless keeping an eye on the event through CCTV. The event organisers had not applied for permission to hold the event and it would have been illegal, but apparently the authorities had put in an application on their behalf without informing them.