7000 demonstrate for the right to work as police impose strict conditions on protest.
Police behind the cordons protecting the Conservative Party conference from right to work protesters
This was, according to the police, an entirely peaceful march, with no criminal offences taking place. It was predominantly a trade union march, upbeat and with plenty of colourful banners. Yet the police still insisted on imposing strict conditions on the route, refusing to allow the march anywhere near the Conservative Party conference which was the focus of the protests. These conditions were ‘robustly’ enforced with ten foot metal cordons, dogs and huge numbers of police officers.
When, towards the end of the march, some from the anarchist block decided to force the point and leave the authorised route, they were immediately ‘kettled’ - surrounded and held by police and dog units. The fifty or so in the kettle were pushed and shoved towards the car park where coaches were waiting, and were told they would be searched and released. Police cameramen carefully filmed each person as they were searched, getting close up shots of head and shoulders, clothing, shoes and ‘identifying features’. Police also demanded they give their name and address on film. The legality of all this is dubious - the Public Order Act (section 60) gives the police powers to search people for weapons but not, as they did here, to gather intelligence for their database while they are doing it.
When about half of the group objected to being filmed in this way, and refused to co-operate with the search while police cameras were present, the police response was to search them by force. At least one protester was left with severe bruising, another missing clumps of hair. None of the searches resulted in anything ‘untoward’ being found, there were no items seized and no arrests.
West Midlands intelligence gatherer 475
Generally the surveillance, while often discrete, was ever present. A large police mobile CCTV van (bearing the words Football Operations) was parked at the march start point. The National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU), the unit that exists to keep tabs on ‘domestic extremists’ were there too, gathering their own ‘intel’. A very expensive police helicopter hovered above. And police cameramen took photographs from windows of a number of buildings lining the route (out of reach of Fitwatchers!).
Given the extent of surveillance of their members on this march, it is remarkable (though perhaps not surprising) that the unions don’t do more to question where the line is between ‘facilitating’ protest, and controlling political expression.
Police surround protester about to be forcibly searched
Fitwatching at Climate Camp Edinburgh
The poor old FIT coppers from the shadowy National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) seem to be having a hard time in Edinburgh this week.
A video put out on you tube yesterday showed a great bit of Fitwatching by Climate Camp activists. With determination and some nerve they surrounded NPOIU cop Mark Sully and his expensive long zoom lens camera with scarves and banners. They then held their ground as Sully clearly became frustrated, pointlessly snapping his camera over the banners.
This sort of action is far from being a mere bit of bravado. Sully (CO996) and his sidekick Ian Caswell (1818), are not neutral keepers of the peace, as the police often pretend they are. Their role is to gather intelligence on, and disrupt the actions of climate camp activists. Activists identified photographed by Sully’s long lens camera will find themselves labelled domestic extremists with their own file on NPOIU’s database. Climate campers should buy these guys a drink!
According to reports, Scottish FIT were keen to come across as different to the Met. They were friendly, extremely friendly, happy to hang out on the gate, chatting with the gate shift, passing the time of day. There is nothing wrong with friendly, of course, but activists should know that with a FIT cop all is rarely what it seems. Climate campers would be wise to keep them at a very long arms length, no matter how friendly they are.
Overall policing has been described as fairly low key, perhaps reflecting the desire of RBS to keep the whole thing out of the press. There have been scuffles though, between police and activists outside the RBS building. Two people are reported to have been injured enough to need hospital treatment, both injuries apparently the result of being kicked by police officers. Two others were arrested for breach of the police offences, apparently entirely randomly.
Were you there? Reports on the policing of the site / arrests / assaults on activists are very welcome. Mail us on info@fitwatch.org.uk
Fitwatch, Policing and Climate Camp Cymru
1818 - Ian Caswell
A Fitwatchers experience at Climate Camp Cymru (CCC):
The policing strategy for CCC 2010 was bizarre, disproportionate and manipulative. The event started when we swooped the site for CCC. We had already had to turn down two previous options for the site, one because of bad luck and an angry farmer and the second (which was the site of the previous camp) was crawling in cops from early morning.
The first sign of the police was a helicopter which flew around the site and the surrounding area and disappeared. When the police arrived on site the Community Liaison Officers from the year before identified themselves (Sergeant Conker-Female and Inspector Smith-Male), both promised a quiet relaxed policing style with minimal uniform presence and an eye to keeping the peace. This was shattered several hours later by two plain clothes police climbing out of a blue BMW.
They identified themselves simply as Police Negotiators and were very aggressive. They told us that the owner of the land had been duped and that we had effectively squatted the land and committed trespass. He also said that we could be committing aggravated trespass since the farmer had intentions for the field which we were preventing him from carrying out. He also said that the site was of interest to CADW which are the Welsh historical preservation society and that we could be damaging the field. During these negotiations the police began to bring in several vans of EGT officers (numbers to follow) and several Intelligence Officers. The day ended with us being told that the farmer would negotiate with us in the morning with the negotiating team present. We agreed and got some sleep.
The next morning the negotiations began, and whilst they started the police cynically brought in an Wildlife Crime Officer to chat to us on the gate. The negotiations ended with us having no official or implied permission from the farmer. We were also told that we had committed damage to an ancient site by placing tent pegs in the ground. From then on the police attitude become more confrontational, they stopped anyone from entering the camp. If we left we would not be allowed back in (denying us water) stopping new members of CCC from joining us. The police brought in floodlights, dozens of vans, a bizarre mobile intelligence van with the words EXCELERATE on the sides, mounted police and more EGT teams in an un-marked van (reg CON6DBZ).
We were essentially surrounded and eventually the police told us that if we did not leave the site we would be arrested for aggravated trespass. We made a decision to leave the site and save ourselves for further actions. We began to pack up as over one hundred cops came on site and ensured that we left. Intelligence Officers used EGT teams to identify those of significance, particularly those in masks, medics and perceived organisers. We left the site and made our way to another, followed the whole while by vans of police. They continued to monitor us for several days, but did not manage to prevent several affinity groups from leaving the site, making their way back to Neath, making their way through forests and mine security to enter and leave an open cast mine without any interference from the police.
Also worthy of note is the presence of the female negotiator from the Cardiff EDL demo. She was on the lawn in plain clothes and unidentifiable as police advising people to leave. Also present was 1818 Ian Caswell from NPIOU.
There is a lot of information that has been gathered by many from CCC including Fitwatchers, Legal Observers and Photographers. The intention of CCC is to gather all such evidence and present it in a more formal style to the Fit-watch blog and thus to other Fitwatchers
Thus far this is a preliminary report and will be continued as soon as we centralise information.
Police all out to gather intelligence on EDL and Counter Demo.
FIT at Stop the War
>
>How 'charming' will the Met be at this year's climate camp?
>
>On the buses
>
FIT and evidence gatherers at the Brighton demo were given an exceptionally hard time. Evidence gatherers were pushed out of the crowd as it assembled near Brighton pier, and their cameras were the focus of constant attention from that point onwards. Photographers crowded them, demonstrators squirted water at them, FITwatchers blocked them. So presumably, these two took it upon themselves to escape from all that and hide on the top deck of a bus where no-one would notice them.
There is just one problem with that decision – it quite possibly meant that their filming of the march from this point was unlawful.
Their problem is RIPA, The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. This defines covert surveillance as follows:
(a) surveillance is covert if, and only if, it is carried out in a manner that is calculated to ensure that persons who are subject to the surveillance are unaware that it is or may be taking place;
This type of surveillance is perfectly lawful if the police have justified it and obtained the appropriate authorisation. It is, apparently, quite an onerous process. According to an ACPO review it takes on average five hours to fill in the forms for an authorisation. Somehow I suspect that these two just didn’t bother to do that.
Normal FIT surveillance escapes all this because it is OVERT rather than COVERT. This means, according to the Met, “officers should clearly identify themselves as police officers and not hide the fact that they are filming”*.
COVERT filming, as defined by RIPA, carried out without authorisation, is of questionable legality. I am sure Sussex police, concerned as they are to prevent breaches of the law, will now conduct a thorough enquiry, discipline those involved and destroy the footage taken. Of course.
Follow Us!
Donate to Fitwatch
Hosted by tachanka.org
Recent Posts
- FIT at Mayday march, London
- FITwatch: The Open Public Meeting
- Questioning the tactic of “questioning the tactic” of wearing masks at demos
- ‘Extremist’ policing of Leicester EDL demo
- HMIC report into domestic extremist units disgusting and farcical
Links
- Campaign Against Criminalising Communities
- Corporate Watch
- Glasgow Defence Campaign
- Green and Black Cross
- HSBC Defence Campaign
- Legal Defence and Monitoring Group
- Netcu watch
- Network for Police Monitoring
- Newham Monitoring Project
- Police State UK
- Random Blowe
- Standing up to surveillance conference
- Statewatch
Archives
Categories
Twitter Feed
- THIS SUNDAY,1PM, LARC, E1: Come to the FITwatch Open Public Meeting to be part of the fight against #totalpolicing http://t.co/iMPZNSjs
- Calling all potential fitwatchers...open meeting 1pm Sunday 25th March, LARC, London
- Go to trial - crash the criminal justice system. A view from New York http://t.co/3xtKlYS0
- RT @SamWalton: @copwatcher @policemonitor I wouldn't mind a protest at the Olympics. Why wasn't I asked?