Fitwatch Resisting and Monitoring Forward Intelligence Policing

15Dec/1010

Oppose intelligence led policing

Posted by admin

Lib-dem ex cop Brian Paddick

Aaron Porter, the NUS leader who has consistently condemned violence and property damage on demonstrations, has now joined ex cop Brian Paddick in calling for the Met to improve its intelligence gathering.

The best case scenario is Mr Porter is ignorant and should talk to a few of the activists and organisers who have been at the sharp end of police intelligence gathering over the last decade.

From past experiences, this is a snapshot of what student activists might expect from ‘improved’ intelligence and data gathering:

• Having to run a gauntlet of police and police cameras just to get to a planning or preparation meeting, never mind a demo;
• FIT teams ‘accompanying’ known activists on demonstrations, even to the point of following them back to their family home, place of work, or in one well documented case to their grandmothers nursing home;
• Thousands of students’ names and details placed on Criminal Intelligence or Domestic Extremism databases;
• Finding a police officer you’ve never seen before knows your name and personal details about you;
• A range of ‘disruption’ activities, to undermine and make life difficult for organisers and activist groups including excessive stop and searches (often many times in one day) and arbitrary arrests. This can also include undercover police officers getting involved with and disrupting activist meetings
• Trolling of websites with a targeted police ‘message’;
• Kettles, kettles and more kettles – they are so useful for data gathering, and for disrupting protest;
• Stop and search, breach of the peace arrests, and accusations of ‘anti-social behaviour’, all tried and trusted methods of getting the personal details of protesters

Over the last decade, the target of police intelligence hasn’t been the so-called criminal element, but the organiser, the facilitator, the groups who get active and make protest happen. These are the people most likely to feel the brunt of police tactics, and suffer real harassment for daring to organise demonstrations. However, the objective is to frighten away as many as possible, including those ‘on the periphery’ - the large contingent who support what is going on, but who may not have the commitment to keep going when the going gets tough.

Police intelligence gathering and ‘disruption’ doesn’t just prevent criminal activity – it seeks to deter people from getting involved in any protest at which criminality can occur. In effect, this means any they don’t like and certainly any with the audacity to not stick to a state approved A-B route or a protest pen.

The ‘harassment style policing’ of intelligence teams has a much greater effect on our civil liberties and our ability to organise and protest than any number of water cannons or horse charges, and must be opposed. As usual, Aaron Porter should be a lot more careful about what he says.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon
4Oct/1012

7000 demonstrate for the right to work as police impose strict conditions on protest.

Posted by admin

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

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon
1Feb/103

stop and search

Posted by Really Fit

>

Climate protestors this weekend won a major High Court victory against the unlawful police stop and search operation used against protesters at their camp in Kingsnorth, Kent in August 2008.
It had been the largest and most expensive such operation in UK history involving 26 police forces. Led by Kent police, these forces carried out a continuous, systematic and unlawful mass stop and search regime

In the High Court the police accepted an Order that the searches of the three claimants had been 'unlawful', and constituted a violation oftheir human rights to privacy (breach of Article 8 of the EuropeanConvention on Human Rights), to freedom of expression (breach ofArticle 10) and freedom of association (breach of Article 11).

Climate camp legal team have suggested that the 3,500 other searches carried under the same search laws (s1 PACE) would also have been unlawful.. All those searched under such laws can now sue the police and submit claims for damages. Those affected should log on to the climate camp website http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/ to see how to proceed with a claim.

The legal team claim that this case was won despite police efforts to deny there was any systematic stop and search policy. Their ludicrous position collapsed after a key 'smoking gun' document came to light revealing that the police 'bronze commanders' in charge of the operation atKingsnorth were systematically giving briefings for blanket stop and searches.

Three FITwatch defendants who were arrested and imprisoned for four days for photographing the stop and search operation at Kingsnorth are also persuing legal action.

Twitter del.icio.us Digg Facebook linked-in Yahoo Buzz StumbleUpon