Government upholds NUJ member's European Court victory over 'stop and search' anti-terror law

The Government said today that it will not appeal the ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that 'stop and search' anti-terror laws were "unlawful" following a case bought by NUJ member Pennie Quinton.
Quinton was one of two people stopped near an arms fair in London in 2003 and prevented from filming the event.
The European Court ruled the pair’s right to respect for a private and family life had been violated. It awarded them 33,850 euros (£30,400) in compensation.
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows the Home Secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances. But the European Court of Human Rights said the people's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
Home Secretary Theresa May said today the government would not appeal and police will now not be allowed to use the powers unless they "reasonably suspect" a person of being a terrorist. It is Section 44 which was used to stop photographers taking pictures in well known public places and led to the 'I'm a photographer not a terrorist' campaign.
Human rights campaigners Liberty said it had "criminalised and alienated more people than it ever protected".
In a Commons statement, the Home Secretary said: "The first duty of government is to protect the public but that duty must never be used as a reason to ride roughshod over our civil liberties.
"The government cannot appeal this judgement, although we would not have done so had we been able. We have always been clear in our concerns about these powers and they will be included as part of our review of counter-terrorism legislation."
She said after taking legal advice and consulting with police forces, the use of Section 44 powers will now be restricted to searching vehicles.

Photographer stopped again by City of London Police using Section 44 anti-terror laws

The Guardian is reporting today that Grant Smith, a renowned architectural photographer, has again been subject to a stop and search by police under anti-terrorist powers while trying to photograph the capital's skyline.
Smith was taking photographs near London Wall, when he was stopped by officers from City of London police. It is the second time in six months that Smith has been stopped by City police under the controversial section 44 of the Terrorism Act, which allows officers to stop and search anyone without need for suspicion in designated areas.
The Guardian's Paul Lewis reports that "Smith said he was first approached by a security guard asserting he could not photograph a building. When he asserted his lawful right to continue taking images, police were called. He said two uniformed officers detained him, one by grabbing his arms behind his back, and refused requests to record the stop and search on his camera. He added that they even refused to let him use a pen and paper to note down their details. He was told he was being held under section 44 because of his "obstructive and non-compliant attitude", and said police left him feeling "humiliated" after manhandling him in front of office workers."

• Photographers concern about section 44 prompted the "I'm a photographer not a terrorist!" protest group and a mass demo in Trafalgar Square in January. (Pic: Jon Slattery)
  

NUJ member wins case against terror law

NUJ member Pennie Quinton has won a victory in the European Court of Human Rights which has upheld her complaint against the use of terror laws to stop and search people without grounds for suspicion. Her victory has been haild by the NUJ as a "victory for media freedom". Quinton, represented by Liberty at the hearing, was one of two people stopped near an arms fair in London in 2003 and was was stopped from filming the event.
The court ruled the pair’s right to respect for a private and family life had been violated. It awarded them 33,850 euros (£30,400) in compensation.
Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 allows the home secretary to authorise police to make random searches in certain circumstances. But the European Court of Human Rights said the people's rights under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights had been violated.
The act removed the previous requirements that the police had to have grounds for suspicion in order to conduct a search.The court today said the stop and search powers were "not sufficiently circumscribed" and there were not "adequate legal safeguards against abuse". It is expected the UK government will be forced to change the law and scrap Section 44, which has caused controversey by being used to stop photographers taking pictures of famous landmarks.
NUJ general secretary Jeremy Dear said: “Congratulations to Pennie and Liberty. Today’s judgement strikes a major blow for media freedom - showing that the random stop and search used against journalists is illegal. In far too many cases recently these powers have been used to stop journalists and in particular photographers from carrying out their work. The court has agreed with us that such powers are being abused.”

Independent highlights police abuse of Section 44 anti-terror law against photographers

The Independent today continues to highlight fears that police officers are abusing the Section 44 anti-terror legislation to stop and question photographers taking pictures of famous landmarks.
Yesterday, The Independent reported concern that police forces across the country are misusing the Section 44 legislation granted to them under the Terrorism Act, which allows them to stop anyone they want in a pre-designated area, without the need for suspicions of an offence having been committed.
It followed journalist Jerome Taylor being stopped by police while taking nighttime shots of the Houses of Parliament. He was asked to give his height, name, address and ethnicity – all of which was recorded in a form that will now be held at the nearest police station for the next year. The form explained why he had been stopped: "Using a camera and tripod next to Westminster Bridge."
The Indy reports today that photographers have complained that they are regularly stopped while taking pictures and are treated like terrorists on reconnaissance missions. This is despite the act giving officers no power to seize cameras or demand the deletion of photographs.
It quotes Jeff Moore, chairman of the British Press Photographers' Association (BPPA), stating: "The main problem we face is that Section 44 is an extremely poor piece of legislation that creates an enormous amount of confusion, both among the public and among the police officers that use it."
Moore said police have ignored the BPPA's requests over the past four years to have photographers talk to newly qualified police constables during their media training. He said: "We're not trying to fight the police, we're trying to work with them."
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of civil liberties group, tells the Independent: "Hassling photographers and preventing them from carrying out perfectly ordinary assignments helps nobody, but blame must rest squarely with Parliament. It is time for this blunt and overly broad power to be tightened," she said.
In a comment piece, Magnum photographer Stuart Franklin tells how he was stopped by police on a journalistic assignment in Regent's Park.