Monday, April 20, 2009
The need for impartial policing
I have said before that in my view the role of the police in any democratic society is to facilitate demonstrations not to stifle them or to take sides. This is clearly too idealistic because frankly the record of the boys in blue is not good.
In a comment to a previous post Jennie reminded me of the partisan role of the police in the miners' strike in the 1980s. It was an unfortunate episode in the history of our democracy that I had hoped was behind us. Apparently, that is not the case.
This morning's Guardian offers more food for thought. In this case they say that it was Government officials who handed confidential police intelligence about environmental activists to the energy giant E.ON before a planned peaceful demonstration:
Intelligence passed to the energy firm by officials from the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) included detailed information about the movements of protesters and their meetings. E.ON was also given a secret strategy document written by environmental campaigners and information from the Police National Information and Coordination Centre (PNICC), which gathers national and international intelligence for emergency planning.
At first officials at BERR refused to release the emails, despite a request under the Freedom of Information Act from the Liberal Democrats. The decision was reversed on appeal and although large sections have been blacked out, they show:
• BERR officials passed a strategy document belonging to the "environmental protest community" to E.ON, saying: "If you haven't seen this then you will be interested in its contents."
• Government officials forwarded a Metropolitan police intelligence document to E.ON, detailing the movements and whereabouts of climate protesters in the run-up to demonstration.
• E.ON passed its planning strategy for the protest to the department's civil servants, adding: "Contact numbers will follow."
• BERR and E.ON tried to share information about their media strategies before the protest, and civil servants asked the energy company for press contacts for EDF, BP and Kent police.
The picture that is presented is one of collusion between government and police to undermine a legitimate protest. It is not one I am comfortable with especially in light of the dubious police tactics at the Kingsnorth camp. My concerns are summed up by two comments in the report:
David Howarth MP, who obtained the emails, said they suggested BERR had attempted to politicise the police, using their intelligence to attempt to disrupt a peaceful protest. "It is as though BERR was treating the police as an extension of E.ON's private security operation," he said. "The question is how did that [police] intelligence get to BERR? Did it come via the Home Office or straight from police? And once they'd got this intelligence, what did they do with it?"
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said the sharing of police intelligence between BERR and E.ON was a serious abuse of power. "The government is in danger of turning police constables into little more than bouncers and private security guards for big business. Police should be used to protect potential victims but also to facilitate people's right to protest," she said.
It is time to reassert the need for the police to be an impartial force for good in our society and to root out those who abuse their authority at whatever level.
In a comment to a previous post Jennie reminded me of the partisan role of the police in the miners' strike in the 1980s. It was an unfortunate episode in the history of our democracy that I had hoped was behind us. Apparently, that is not the case.
This morning's Guardian offers more food for thought. In this case they say that it was Government officials who handed confidential police intelligence about environmental activists to the energy giant E.ON before a planned peaceful demonstration:
Intelligence passed to the energy firm by officials from the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) included detailed information about the movements of protesters and their meetings. E.ON was also given a secret strategy document written by environmental campaigners and information from the Police National Information and Coordination Centre (PNICC), which gathers national and international intelligence for emergency planning.
At first officials at BERR refused to release the emails, despite a request under the Freedom of Information Act from the Liberal Democrats. The decision was reversed on appeal and although large sections have been blacked out, they show:
• BERR officials passed a strategy document belonging to the "environmental protest community" to E.ON, saying: "If you haven't seen this then you will be interested in its contents."
• Government officials forwarded a Metropolitan police intelligence document to E.ON, detailing the movements and whereabouts of climate protesters in the run-up to demonstration.
• E.ON passed its planning strategy for the protest to the department's civil servants, adding: "Contact numbers will follow."
• BERR and E.ON tried to share information about their media strategies before the protest, and civil servants asked the energy company for press contacts for EDF, BP and Kent police.
The picture that is presented is one of collusion between government and police to undermine a legitimate protest. It is not one I am comfortable with especially in light of the dubious police tactics at the Kingsnorth camp. My concerns are summed up by two comments in the report:
David Howarth MP, who obtained the emails, said they suggested BERR had attempted to politicise the police, using their intelligence to attempt to disrupt a peaceful protest. "It is as though BERR was treating the police as an extension of E.ON's private security operation," he said. "The question is how did that [police] intelligence get to BERR? Did it come via the Home Office or straight from police? And once they'd got this intelligence, what did they do with it?"
Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said the sharing of police intelligence between BERR and E.ON was a serious abuse of power. "The government is in danger of turning police constables into little more than bouncers and private security guards for big business. Police should be used to protect potential victims but also to facilitate people's right to protest," she said.
It is time to reassert the need for the police to be an impartial force for good in our society and to root out those who abuse their authority at whatever level.
Labels: ID
Comments:
<< Home
"A police officer is....a civilian who has jurisdiction under the crown, to protect Life and Property and to maintain Law and Order."
Nothing about being fair or impartial! The crown is HM Government of the day, their paymasters, he who pays the piper calls the tune.
“Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said the sharing of police intelligence between BERR and E.ON was a serious abuse of power. "The government is in danger of turning police constables into little more than bouncers and private security guards for big business…”
….well, they are thugs with pensions!
One thing is certain, they [the police] are no longer policing by consent of the public.
Post a Comment
Nothing about being fair or impartial! The crown is HM Government of the day, their paymasters, he who pays the piper calls the tune.
“Shami Chakrabarti, the director of Liberty, said the sharing of police intelligence between BERR and E.ON was a serious abuse of power. "The government is in danger of turning police constables into little more than bouncers and private security guards for big business…”
….well, they are thugs with pensions!
One thing is certain, they [the police] are no longer policing by consent of the public.
# posted by 
: 8:10 PM
: 8:10 PM<< Home
