Tasers
188. The use of weapons by the police is one which
raises human rights issues. In 1998, the UN Committee Against
Torture expressed concern at the use of plastic bullet rounds
in Northern Ireland as a means of riot control and recommended
that such use be discontinued.[313]
Commenting on the use of Attenuating Energy Projectiles (AEPs)
in Northern Ireland, our predecessor Committee noted that their
use raised clear human rights concerns in principle, but that
use of AEPs in riot situations could be justified as a proportionate
response to serious violence which threatens the lives of the
police or the public. It recommended that the use of AEPs should
be subject to close scrutiny to ensure that these conditions are
met and that there is clarity and consistency in the guidelines
applying to their use.[314]
189. During the course of our inquiry, the Home Secretary
announced her decision to make taser electro-shock weapons available
to specially trained police officers in all forces in England
and Wales, following a Home Office pilot in a number of police
areas.[315] Commenting
on the announcement, Amnesty International, which has previously
expressed concerns about the use of tasers, called on the Government
to guarantee that tasers would only be available to firearms officers
and a limited number of specially trained officers across the
UK. It also called on the Home Office to demonstrate how the
use of tasers is compatible with the UK's obligations under international
human rights laws.[316]
190. We asked DCC Sim, Deputy Chief Constable of
Northumbria Police, which participated in one of the pilots, to
comment on the proposals and in particular on the use of tasers
in public order or protest situations. Responding, DCC Sim stated
that tasers issued to specially trained units (STUs) should only
be deployed:
when officers or the public are facing,
or likely to face serious violence
I do not see any situation
when STUs would be deployed to a protest, indeed the very nature
of taser is such that it should not be deployed against large
numbers of people and officers are trained to use other options
when dealing with these situations.[317]
191. The Home Office Minister agreed with ACPO on
this matter stating:
I cannot envisage a situation in which taser,
which has a very short range anyway, irrespective of the moral
argument around it, practically would be something that would
be useful. I cannot see a situation in which it would be appropriate
to use taser to control demonstration or protest.[318]
192. We were pleased to hear the Minister's and ACPO's
unequivocal statements that tasers should not be used on protestors.
We understand from the Minister that guidance on the use of tasers
will be produced jointly by ACPO and the Home Office. We recommend
that guidance on the use of tasers, to which officers should be
required to have regard, should make clear that the weapons should
not be used against peaceful protestors. In addition, we recommend
that quarterly reports be made to Parliament on the deployment
and use of tasers, including the reasons for their use in specific
incidents. The Government should continue to monitor the medical
effects of the use of tasers and publish its findings.
Police relations with journalists
193. The National Union of Journalists drew our attention
to the particular problems faced by journalists, especially photo-journalists,
when covering demonstrations.[319]
Although recognising that there were some examples of good practice
when police engage with the media, the NUJ suggested that this
was rare[320] and particularly
criticised the work of the police Forward Intelligence Team:
What we are seeing is a group of journalists
who regularly cover protests being stopped and searched, way away
from the protest, being photographed, having information recorded
about what they are wearing, where they are going, who they are
working for and so on, and it is creating an intimidatory atmosphere
that means people are less likely to go out and cover protests.
If we are all saying that publicity is one of the reasons for
protest, actually what the police are doing here is undermining
that freedom of the media and the ability of the protestors to
be able to get their message across via the media.[321]
194. Whilst ACPO/media guidelines have been agreed
between police and the Union, the NUJ suggested that they were
"useless because the police on the street do not know anything
about them".[322]
Jeremy Dear, General Secretary of the NUJ, told us that he wanted
the Home Office to make sure that the police abided by the guidelines,
rather than force journalists to challenge police practice in
the courts.[323] He
also advocated better training of police and better enforcement
of the guidelines such as through police employment contracts.[324]
195. The Campaign Against the Arms Trade alleged
that police appeared to be encouraging journalists not to cover
some demonstrations, such as those at the premises of an arms
manufacturer, as it would be "irresponsible" to do so.[325]
196. The NUJ wrote to the Home Secretary expressing
concern at police surveillance of journalists[326]
and subsequently had a meeting with the Minister, Vernon Coaker
MP. Following the meeting, the ACPO/media guidelines were revised
and the Minister wrote to the NUJ stating:
We have addressed this directly in the revised
guidance making it clear that the Terrorism Act 2000 does not
prohibit people from taking photographs or digital images. The
guidance also makes it clear that film and memory cards may be
seized as part of a search but officers do not have a legal power
to delete images or destroy film.[327]
197. The Minister also told us that the NUJ had been
invited to talk to ACPO and to attend demonstrations with the
police to advise them on possible changes to procedures.[328]
198. When we asked police representatives about the
concerns surrounding police relations with journalists, the Metropolitan
Police told us that "it is in all of our operation orders
that journalists have a right to operate and we would not seek
to stop it
We fully accept that we are accountable and we
can be photographed and they have a right to operate and we try
to ensure that that message gets to all of our officers all of
the time".[329]
199. The OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines note the important
role that journalists play in covering demonstrations and protests:
Journalists have an important role to play in
providing independent coverage of public assemblies. As such,
they must be distinguished from participants and be given as much
access as possible by the authorities.[330]
200. It is unacceptable that individual journalists
are left with no option but to take court action against officers
who unlawfully interfere with their work. Journalists have the
right to carry out their lawful business and report the way in
which demonstrations are handled by the police without state interference,
unless such interference is necessary and proportionate, and journalists
need to be confident that they can carry out their role. The
public in turn have the right to impart and receive information:
the media are the eyes and ears of the public, helping to ensure
that the police are accountable to the people they serve. Effective
training of front line police officers on the role of journalists
in protests is vital. Police forces should consider how to ensure
their officers follow the media guidelines which have been agreed
between ACPO and the NUJ, and take steps to deal with officers
who do not follow them.
239 Q 183. Back
240
Q 200. Back
241
Q 186. Back
242
Q 253. Back
243
Ev 147. Back
244
Q 185. Back
245
Qq 194 & 198. Back
246
Q 203. Back
247
Q 303. Back
248
Q 306. Back
249
OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines, paras. 70-71. Back
250
Q 194. Back
251
Q 187. Back
252
Q 195. Back
253
Q 196. Back
254
Q 197. Back
255
Q 307. Back
256
National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit (www.netcu.org.uk). Back
257
Ev 73. Back
258
Ev 73. Back
259
Ev 115, para. 29; Q 157. Back
260
Ev 113, para. 7. Back
261
Q 158. Back
262
Ev 94. Back
263
Ev 203. Back
264
Ev 146. Back
265
E.g. Ev 92, 94, 127, 142 and 191: "The vast majority of protests
are undertaken with collaboration between the police and organisers
where the two parties work together to ensure that the event occurs
in a reasonable and safe manner. More controversial events normally
involve individuals who do not wish to cooperate or consult with
authorities and, at times, actively seek or encourage confrontation." Back
266
Ev 146. Back
267
Ev 183. Back
268
Ibid. Back
269
Ev 97. Back
270
Ev 146 and Q 90. Back
271
Ev 146. Back
272
ACPO Manual of Guidance, Public Order: Standards, Tactics and
Training, Centrex, March 2004. Back
273
ACPO Manual of Guidance, p. 8. Back
274
ACPO Manual of Guidance, p. 8. Back
275
Ev 77. Back
276
Independent Commission on Policing in Northern Ireland, 1999. Back
277
McCausland, D., Policing Parades and Protest in Northern Ireland
[2007] EHRLR 212. Back
278
Ev 183. Back
279
Q 204. Back
280
Q 203. Back
281
Q 51. Back
282
Quoted in McCausland, above, p. 212: "It is our aim to provide
a high quality, effective policing service to all the people of
Northern Ireland
In policing public events this aim will
be to the fore. The human rights of all those affected by such
events will be central to all stages of police preparations and
subsequent actions. It is recognised that not all human rights
are absolute rights and in some instances the rights of individuals
must be balanced with those of others, including those of differing
and wider communities." Back
283
Q 190. Back
284
Police Authorities (Particular Functions and Transitional Provisions)
Order 2008 (SI 2008/82). Back
285
Section 3(3)(b)(ii) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 2000.
The human rights advisers to the Policing Board have produced
a human rights monitoring framework, annual reports on the compliance
of the PSNI with the HRA and two reports on the policing of parades
in which serious violent disorder occurred. Northern Ireland
Policing Board, Report on the Policing of the Ardoyne Parades
12th July 2004 and Report on the Policing of the Ardoyne Parades
12th July 2005 and the Whiterock Parade 10th September 2005. Back
286
Association of Police Authorities, Human Rights Guidance for Police
Authorities - Monitoring Compliance with the Human Rights Act
1998, January 2009. Back
287
Association of Police Authorities, Human Rights Guidance for Police
Authorities, p.5. Back
288
Association of Police Authorities, Human Rights Guidance for Police
Authorities, p.5. Back
289
Q 207. Back
290
E.g. Ev 92, 94, and 127. Back
291
Ev 191. Back
292
Ev 94. Back
293
Q 205. Back
294
Q 232. Back
295
Q 180. Back
296
Qq 158/9. Back
297
Ev 72. Back
298
Ev 97. Back
299
The protestors had agreed with the police that they would process
from their camp to the power station and back. The route and
timing of the procession had been agreed. Twenty minutes before
the procession was due to conclude, an order was given by one
of the police helicopters to the protestors to disperse. They
were told that if they did not do so, police horses, dogs and
batons would be used against them. Ev 112. Back
300
Ev 72. Back
301
Q 223. Back
302
Q 17 and Ev 158. See also Chapter 5 above on protest around Parliament
specifically. Back
303
Aldemir v Turkey, App. No. 32124/02, 18 December 2007, paras 40-43.
This is reiterated in the OSCE/ODIHR Guidelines, p. 15. Back
304
Q 290. Back
305
See Chapter 3 above, paras 52-57. Back
306
Ev 115. Back
307
Q 129. Back
308
Q 235. Back
309
Q 256. Back
310
Q 253. Back
311
Q 257. Back
312
Qq 286-87. Back
313
Concluding Observations of the Committee Against Torture: United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 17 November 1998,
A/54/44. Back
314
Nineteenth Report of Session 2005-06, The UN Convention Against
Torture, HL Paper 185-I, HC 701-I, para. 181. Back
315
24 November 2008. Back
316
Tasers: Only best-trained officers should have Tasers, says Amnesty,
Press Release, 24 November 2008. Back
317
Ev 192. Back
318
Q 61. Back
319
See above, para. 50. Back
320
Q 90. Back
321
Q 97. Back
322
Q 99. Back
323
Q 102. Back
324
Q 105. Back
325
Ev 101, para. 21. Back
326
Extract from NUJ letter to Home Secretary dated 22 May 2008: "We
have serious concerns about the activities of the Metropolitan
Police's Forward Intelligence Team (FIT Team) in monitoring and
recording the activities of bona fide journalists, especially
photographers. A number of members have alleged that the police's
surveillance action amounts to virtual harassment and is a serious
threat to their right to carry out their lawful employment";
reproduced in full in Ev 177. Back
327
Letter of 3 December 2008 from Vernon Coaker MP to Jeremy Dear,
General Secretary of the National Union of Journalists. Back
328
Q 292. Back
329
Q 252. Back
330
OSCE/ODIHR, Guidelines on Freedom of Peaceful Assembly, p. 17. Back