Archive for March, 2009

These days, demonstrators are having to barge through swarms of not only photo journalists, but thousands of spectators wielding camera phones instead of placards. Could this be spoiling the impact of mass protests against dubious government plans?The situation has clearly got out of hand, with photos perhaps dominating too much of our life, but should these photographers at protests be made illegal?

Well, since February taking photos of members of the police force, intelligence services or armed forces can land you in jail for up to ten years. The law has come in to force as part of the fight against terrorism, as the government feel photographs of police officers can be used in support of terrorist acts.

Both the press and the public have therefore found themselves submitting to a breach of human rights. The legacy of famous protests of the late 20th century, for example the race riots of 1977, the miners strikes of 1984/85 and the poll tax riots of 1990, have strongly depended on photographs taken of both policemen and protesters, and there are a large amount of photos in circulation that serve as proof of police violence towards protesters.

During the miners’ strike, for example, policemen who were fully aware they were committing unlawful violence removed their numbers so they could not be identified, but people were able to take photos that incriminated the offending police officers. In a court case where the police are prosecuting a demonstrator, the protester is at a great disadvantage; whereas the police and armed forces may have photographic proof against the demonstrator, the demonstrator will have no evidence against the police, perhaps to show that any acts of violence were in defence.

Even the Metropolitan Police Federation is sceptical about the new law. Its chairman, Peter Smyth, said: “There is a real risk of photographers being hampered in carrying out their legitimate work.”

Not only is the law a breach of human rights, it fails to serve the purpose it was intended for. It’s unlikely that a terrorist will be able to make much use of a photograph of an individual policeman. Generally, terrorists aim to make a big impact, not just intimidate a few members of the police force. One may therefore ask why has this law really been passed? Perhaps there is a hidden motive, and the law is just a way of extending social control. This may be one of the first steps towards a society in which the police, politicians and celebrities are able to do as they wish in public, while the masses find themselves under even more surveillance.     

Eight members of Goldsmiths Feminist Society were arrested after chaining themselves to the doors at the venue for Miss University London’s final. Read the rest of this entry »

LSE students are set to march on Strand rivals King’s, claiming that they stole their penguin. Read the rest of this entry »