Amateur Photographer & What Digital Camera: Photography in Public Spaces and The Metropolitan Police.

I'm sure readers will be fascinated by the condescending reply I received about the Met's ridiculous photography anti-terror campaign just yesterday:

-----Original Message-----
From: Smith Neil J - SO15
Sent: 14 May 2008 13:40
To: fotonix
Cc: Smith Neil J - SO15; Henegan Nick - DPA
Subject: Re: 1. Registration Neil Smith In progress

Dear Mr Rowlands

Freedom of Information Request Reference No: 2008040005491

I write in connection with your request for information which was received by the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) on 18/04/2008. I note you seek access to the following information:

· The Met currently runs an advert supposedly aimed at raising awareness about \'odd\' behaviour relating to photography. I would like to ask: (a) On what basis, evidence, or understanding did the Met decide that photography actually or potentially poses a threat to public or national security? (b) How many convictions relating to terrorism have had a clearly-identifiable element where photography in a public space was unequivocally shown to be instrumental to the crime? (c) Photography is public spaces is one of the lawful freedoms enjoyed by citizens of the UK. However, very may cases of unlawful interference with both professional and amateur photographers are well documented, especially within urban areas. What demonstrable action is the Met taking to ensure its officers fully understand the law relating to photography in public spaces, and how does it address those incidents where a misunderstanding of the law has occurred?

Mr Rowlands,

Your request has been forwarded to the Counter Terrorism Command for response as the issues you raise are presumed to emanate from publicity prompted by this department.

I have attached a link to relevant MPS media campaign websites.

http://cms.met.police.uk/news/publicity_...mpaign_25_02_08

http://www.met.police.uk/so/at_hotline.htm

The items/activities on the advertisements have been given due consideration and are trends amongst evidence given in court at recent terrorism trials.The purpose of the campaign is not to target legitimate photographers, or to raise fear, but to raise awareness amongst the public of the Anti-Terrorist Hotline.

Research shows that when thinking about terrorism the public often think about the point of attack and not the planning stages of an attack. With this in mind the series of advertisements intend to make people think about the planning stages. This is often referred to as hostile reconnaissance.

The camera creative addresses the issue that terrorists need and undertake surveillance on security equipment and services, eg CCTV cameras. We want to encourage the public to report such suspicious activity so that police can take appropriate action to disrupt any potential planning. We also want to make London a hostile environment for terrorists.

Referring to your request. It is not really a 'request for held information' as the Freedom of Information (FOI) access rights entitle. It is more of a statement in which you clearly express you concerns about this particular Counter Terrorism policy.

FOI is not a discussion forum by which to conduct a debate, but is a mechanism by which the public can ask for information held by a public authority. I have therefore attached the weblinks which in intended to explain the purpose of the strategy. Its objectives are to inform the public how they can help to combat terrorism, and perhaps avoid further terrorist attacks. Access rights under Freedom of Information are explained on various website (that of the Campaign for Freedom of Information (cfoi) is a comparatively easy read)

Whilst FOI positively does not require or encourage a debate, I do feel it may be helpful to explain some general issues concerning the matters you raise.

a) There have been cases where the planning activities of terror cells have been documented and recorded on film or video. Perhaps if I draw your attention to the much reported case of Dhiren Barot. You will see the sort of material this campaign is intended to address. In that case, he and others in a UK based terror cell carried out video surveillance of various key targets in New York (including the Twin Towers shortly before the attack on 9/11). This sort of evidence figures in many terrorism cases. Section 58 of the Terrorism Act is designed to combat this sort of terrorism planning conduct.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/nov/07/terrorism.uk
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000011_en_6#pt6-pb1-l1g58

b) You ask for the number of convictions where photographic evidence has been 'instrumental to the crime'. Your question is subjective and essentially invalid for the purposes of FOI. To reach a conclusion as to number, every case file would need to be gone through to establish - firstly whether there was photographic evidence and what the nature of that evidence was, and then to assess the significance of that material in terms of terrorism planning weight. That exercise would take far in excess on the costs limits in terms of FOI requests to quantify, and even then would be subjective.

c) Here you commence by expressing your concerns and views. The balance between public
rights of freedom and issues of safety is not an easy one.

When it comes to combatting terrorism, it is critical that attacks are prevented, and one method by which the public can help the police is to identify the possible offenders during the planning phase, and to report unusual conduct such as highlighted in this media campaign.

Professional or keen amateur photographers may take photographs outside the norm, and that may lead to a higher risk of their actions being of concern to other members of the public and being reported to the police. When such suspected activity is reported, it is for the police to assess whether there are grounds for concern or not, and this may or may not result in the person concerned being asked to explain their actions. Let me also add that hostile reconnaissance is not limited to camera use.

The MPS has produced guidelines for MPS staff on dealing with media reporters, press photographers and television crews. The following link may be of interest to you.

www.nuj.org.uk/getfile.php?id=291

All MPS officers are briefed regularly in terms of counter terrorism activity. One of the MPS's key objectives is the combat of terrorism. The ability of individual officers to assess and deal with all incidents, including those possibly indicating terrorism, will differ accordingly to knowledge and experience. All are trained to conduct stops and question the public professionally and courteously. However someone who believes they have been inappropriately treated regardless of the situation has a right to complain.

Finally I have attached a link to the Home Office website which sets out the wider issues concerning counter-terrorism.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/security/

COMPLAINT RIGHTS

Your attention is drawn to the attached sheet which details your right of complaint.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your interest in the MPS. Whilst my response may not provide the precise information you seek, I have sought to explain the issues in context.

Should you have any further inquiries concerning this matter, please write or contact Neil Smith on telephone number 0207 230 2717 quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

Neil Smith
Detective Inspector
Counter Terrorism Command
New Scotland Yard

Moderators Note: Email address removed.

Edited by Fen (29/05/2008 09:21)

Amateur Photographer Magazine

Subscribe now »