Adventures of an Idiot – occasional ramblings of a photography freak

(Shut ITT – A mass demo against Brighton’s weapons factory, EDO-MBM/ITT. Wednesday 15th October ‘08. Snatches by the cops started virtually straight away… this one for no apparent reason that I could see. Maybe just because he had a camera with him!)

As from Monday last, 16th February, a new bit of legislation came into effect… Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008.

The event seems to have passed without too much notice being taken of it. By members of the general public that is.
Not so photographers. More specifically, photojournalists and other photog types who specialise in taking photographs at protests, demonstrations and suchlike.

[Thinks: That'll be me then!]

Nor by protesters and other activists, who really are a bit pee’d off by it.

On the face of it, this new law may seem fairly reasonable:

“It permits the arrest of anyone found “eliciting, publishing or communicating information” relating to members of the armed forces, intelligence services and police officers, which is ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’.

That means anyone taking a picture of one of those people could face a fine or a prison sentence of up to 10 years, if a link to terrorism is proved.”

(news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7888301.stm)

All well and good. Apart from one tiny little problem… the fact that the police seem to have this really nasty habit of branding yer ordinary common-or-garden protester, political activist, dissident or whatever as an “extremist”. Or… wait for it… a “terrorist”.

Yep. That’s right. The little old lady who decides to take herself off down to Parliament Square to demonstrate against the fact that demonstrations aren’t allowed in Parliament Square unless the cops give their permission (!) runs the very real risk of being nicked as an extremist, or terrorist even!

I kid you not.

And there’s me say, photographing this incident of the little old lady being nicked (which could easily entail something along the lines of up to three big burly cops jumping on her and forcing her to the ground, roughly attaching handcuffs, then dragging her toward the copmobile… again, I kid you not, especially if she were a bit resentful at being nicked) and then I, for example, publish the pics in one of my usual places plus (of course) subsequently making them available to this little old lady so that she can use them to prove police brutality when the case comes up before the beak.

And there’s the rub.

Cos she’s now been branded a “terrorist”. And I’ve communicated pics to her that will no doubt prove useful to her.

So I get nicked and banged up for 10 years (cos there’s no way I can afford to pay a fine of course).

An exaggeration?

Well, maybe. But lots of protesters, activists, and photographer-types are thinking not. And quite rightly we’re all up in arms about it. Cos aside from anything else it also seems to represent a further attempt on the part of the State to muzzle the Press and, at the very least, represents a curtailment of the right/freedom to take photographs in public places.

So I’ve been fairly well exercised by this issue for the past week or so (um… actually quite a bit longer than that, but the past week has seen a much more heightened level of activity from me sorta thing), though not in any way that’d be immediately apparent to anyone not in my “immediate circle” as it were.

Apart from one little thing. Well, quite a big thing actually. Well, more of a long thing in fact.
Namely, a bit of blurb I knocked out with the intention of getting it posted (originally on a fitwatch-type blog, either the “proper” fitwatch blog or my own) actually on the 16th.
(You must remember fitwatch… y’know, the folk that take pics of cops taking pics of protesters.)
Cos it rambles on for a bit though (the blurb that is) I missed the deadline somewhat (by a couple of hours in fact) so ended up posting it to “Tilting at Windmills” (it really is a bit too long for a blog) under the title “Britain 2009″ at about 0200 on Tuesday morning. Still, the intention was there.

Anyway, the reason the damn thing is so long is cos I approached this issue from a slightly different direction to that of other commentators, trying to see this new bit of law in the context of other trends that have been developing since about (as far as I can determine) the late 80s.

And I fully expect to be writing a few more bits and pieces about this in the future.

So the burning question of the day now is, am I gonna get nicked for re-publishing the pics that accompany this post?

Well, if you see no more posts from me for about the next ten years or so (“Phew, what a relief” did I hear someone say?) you’ll have the answer!

(Shut ITT – A mass demo against Brighton’s weapons factory, EDO-MBM/ITT. Wednesday 15th October ‘08. Undeterred, and despite diminished numbers, the protest continues down at Brighton Pier. Miles from the EDO site. With little likelihood of causing a major public disturbance or even significant traffic obstruction why then the continued heavy-handed policing? And here’s the cops stopping the "consenting public" from interfering with a snatch.)