bricolage
18th October 2009, 13:39
It's a strange source to be referencing but it's a strange world. I'll post the whole thing as I think you have to register to see things on their website.
Scotland Yard has been accused of “tarring the innocent” with Big Brother-style surveillance after it emerged that it holds at least 1,500 photographs of protesters on a computer database, many of whom have not been convicted of a crime.
Lawyers and privacy experts questioned whether the image bank complied with UK privacy and data protection laws, despite police claims that they had culled more than 1,000 pictures in the past four months.
Details of the police database, revealed by the Financial Times, come ahead of a protest this weekend at an Eon power station near Nottingham. The disclosure is likely to stoke criticism of police tactics at demonstrations such as London’s G20 protests in April.
Hugh Tomlinson QC, a privacy specialist at Matrix Chambers, said the image store added to “serious concerns” about how the authorities treated surveillance data. “We don’t know what databases are held – and we don’t know what procedures are in place to make sure they are accurate and up to date.”
The Metropolitan Police said it maintained a database of about 1,500 pictures of people who had been convicted of crimes or who, according to police intelligence, were involved in organising or managing “the commission of criminal offences in a public order environment”.
The pictures included photographs of people in custody and “overtly gathered intelligence images”, whose sources included police photographers who cover big demonstrations.
The Met was responding to FT questions after a recent court case. The trial on public order offences of three members of Fit Watch, a pressure group, raised questions about whether the police are acting proportionately in keeping wide-ranging photographic and written intelligence on people who have attended demonstrations. Police use protesters’ images to prepare “spotters’ cards” for officers.
Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said the database was an example of the police “tarring the innocent and the guilty with the same brush”. Anna Mazzola, a lawyer at Hickman & Rose, said it was “far from clear” that the database complied with human rights and data protection laws.
She said: “Until the police make clear the basis on which they are recording and disseminating information on individuals who have committed no crime, people will continue to have fears that the police are infringing their right to privacy,” she said.
Critics say the Met still needs to be far more open about what kind of people are on the database and how the photos are cross-referenced with other intelligence sources.
Scotland Yard said the image bank was governed by strict rules, adding that intelligence gathering was a “recognised tactic in policing”.http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e90908ca-ba90-11de-9dd7-00144feab49a.html
Scotland Yard has been accused of “tarring the innocent” with Big Brother-style surveillance after it emerged that it holds at least 1,500 photographs of protesters on a computer database, many of whom have not been convicted of a crime.
Lawyers and privacy experts questioned whether the image bank complied with UK privacy and data protection laws, despite police claims that they had culled more than 1,000 pictures in the past four months.
Details of the police database, revealed by the Financial Times, come ahead of a protest this weekend at an Eon power station near Nottingham. The disclosure is likely to stoke criticism of police tactics at demonstrations such as London’s G20 protests in April.
Hugh Tomlinson QC, a privacy specialist at Matrix Chambers, said the image store added to “serious concerns” about how the authorities treated surveillance data. “We don’t know what databases are held – and we don’t know what procedures are in place to make sure they are accurate and up to date.”
The Metropolitan Police said it maintained a database of about 1,500 pictures of people who had been convicted of crimes or who, according to police intelligence, were involved in organising or managing “the commission of criminal offences in a public order environment”.
The pictures included photographs of people in custody and “overtly gathered intelligence images”, whose sources included police photographers who cover big demonstrations.
The Met was responding to FT questions after a recent court case. The trial on public order offences of three members of Fit Watch, a pressure group, raised questions about whether the police are acting proportionately in keeping wide-ranging photographic and written intelligence on people who have attended demonstrations. Police use protesters’ images to prepare “spotters’ cards” for officers.
Chris Huhne, Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said the database was an example of the police “tarring the innocent and the guilty with the same brush”. Anna Mazzola, a lawyer at Hickman & Rose, said it was “far from clear” that the database complied with human rights and data protection laws.
She said: “Until the police make clear the basis on which they are recording and disseminating information on individuals who have committed no crime, people will continue to have fears that the police are infringing their right to privacy,” she said.
Critics say the Met still needs to be far more open about what kind of people are on the database and how the photos are cross-referenced with other intelligence sources.
Scotland Yard said the image bank was governed by strict rules, adding that intelligence gathering was a “recognised tactic in policing”.http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/e90908ca-ba90-11de-9dd7-00144feab49a.html