A Human Rights based approach to policing ‘Domestic Extremists’

The past week gave a slightly schizophrenic picture of policing post G20. 'The recent Climate Change protest at Ratcliffe was met with relatively restrained policing compared to G20, continuing the trend from the Blackheath climate camp. Yet, six days later we find out that thousands of peaceful protestors are being logged as ‘domestic extremists’ for as little as attending demonstrations. It appears that whilst our law enforcers have been taking some pains in recent months to respect protestor’s rights, they are equally keen to collect their personal data and secretly label them extremists.

As Paul Lewis points out in his article on the future of policing, some senior figures in ACPO and the Met appear to be listening and learning after the G20 debacle. When the final HMIC report on ‘Adapting to Protest’ is released later this month hopefully we may see the foundations for real long term change from the excessive force which has characterised policing of political protest since the miners strikes and beyond. Senior Met Officers like Bob Broadhurst and Chris Allison, who champion the knuckle-dragging tactics we saw at the G20 and who were responsible for misleading reports in its aftermath look increasingly isolated.

However on surveillance of protests there appears to be no such enlightenment progress. News of the £9m scheme to log ‘domestic extremists’, raises the question as to whether elements of the Police want to suppress more direct action orientated protest entirely. Conflating language such as ‘lawful protest’ with ‘peaceful protest’ gives this impression by seeking to discourage any disruptive form of dissent. This is fundamentally against the principles of a ‘Human Rights based approach to policing and ignores the proud history of protest within our democracy where civil disobedience by suffragettes and the civil rights movement has worked for the benefit of millions.

There is a real need to end this Stasi-like approach to activists, logging their every move. Equally we need to continue to challenge this information gathering at the source by Police Forward Intelligence (FIT), a job valiantly done by FIT watch in the past few years. FIT squads are at the forefront of the type of pre-emptive policing which sees innocent people held on databases meant for criminals, environmental activists arrested for thought crime and re-branding of protestors as extremists.

The extension of police surveillance of protesters, suggests the police force has still to fully recognise its proper role as servants of the citizen not guarantors of the status quo. A move away from disproportionate force alone is not enough. Only a more open, transparent and fair approach to surveillance can achieve this.

So the battle is by no means over. The Metropolitan Police Authority is holding a public meeting next week to conduct further research into the G20 and members of Defend Peaceful Protest are raising the intrusive surveillance issue with them as a matter of urgency.

G20 Policing: 27 Prosecutions, 256 complaints against police officers - call that a success?

So with the final belated prosecutions and court appearences happening it appears the sum total of the police prosecutions against G20 protests is 27. As stated before this figure should be put in context with the 256 complaints made against Police officers. What's even more disturbing is the news that police appear to be ‘making up the numbers’ on prosecutions with 11 rather questionable charges… (see below)

“ONE woman is dressed provocatively in a black bra. Another sports red high heels and stockings. Their long-haired male companions are dressed in scruffy blue boiler suits and the occasional riot helmet.

The costumes may look harmless, but for the Space Hijackers — a small group of part-time anarchists with a penchant for street entertainment — they have been enough to earn them charges of impersonating police officers...”

Source: The Times

At the first meeting of the new MPA Civil Liberties Panel it also transpired that Senior Met officers feel police who fail to show ID in Public Order situations should receive no punishment other than a talking to.

The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) said senior officers must ensure frontline colleagues can be identified.

Some officers were photographed without ID badges during April's G20 protests.
Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison of the Metropolitan Police said discipline may not be appropriate for officers who sometimes forget to attach their ID.

Source: The BBC

So protestors whose disruptive but peaceful protest are prosecuted for 'impersonating a police officer' whilst Police Officers are left unpunished for not displaying ID? Hardly bringing back trust in Policing is it?

Whilst I appreciate that some officers may inadvertantly lose their ID during operations and there may well be geniune accident its noticable that the ones missing ID at the G20 are also the ones under suspicion of violent or inappropriate behaviour. For example, the officer who struck Nicola Fisher and has just been charged was missing his ID.

The Met need to start owning up to the fact that there are bad apples who have been deliberately concealing ID in recent demo's. Senior officers current line seems to be its all a coincidence/accident, which is simply not good enough.