ECHR judgement against UK government on Terrorism Act 2000 s44 'stop and search' abuses

Where would we be without the excellent Spy Blog which does it usual sterling job of highlighting the failings (and the malign policies) of our current shambles of a government - shambolic and authoritarian to boot!

As Spy Blog correctly mentions (as I have pointed out here and in comments elsewhere many times over the years) the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is NOT a body within the EU (the European Court of Justice fulfils that role). The ECHR has ruled against the UK government for its systematic abuse of human rights by its use of the Section 44 'stop and search' provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000 without reasonable cause and is thus in contravention of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The abuse has occurred against photographers, tourists, trainspotters and, amazingly, Members of Parliament.

Will our government pay a blind bit of notice to this ruling (any more than it has to the ruling about the retention of the DNA samples of innocent people, which it lost over a year ago)? We badly need an election to rid ourselves of our dictatorial and, I don't believe I am being in any way melodramatic when I add 'proto-fascist' government, with its [unfortunately rather successful] efforts to turn the UK into a Police State.

What we're not supposed to mention in the UK ...

Injunction, smimjunction - visit here if you care to.

Or indeed:
- here (Telegraph); or
- here (Daily/Sunday Mail); or
- here (Times); or
- here (Financial Times);
- and many hundreds of other articles all around the planet.

The best a man can get?



- The AP news agency reports on what a major sponsor is doing to distance itself from this ongoing disaster. Like many millions of men around the world I use Gillette products on a daily basis; none of this 'brouhaha' is likely to affect my habits in any way, of course. And why should it?

British (English) law is, once again, made to look like a complete ass in a matter that really has little or nothing to do with the UK, with our complaisant legal system being used by a foreigner who doesn't reside here to pursue ends in a foreign country which few in that foreign country or anywhere else are likely to pay much attention to.

But I'm apparently not supposed to talk about it. As Manuel from Fawlty Towers might have said "I know nothing"!

Truly, truly bizarre ...

Police State Britain - citizens fighting back, within the law

I posted a video almost two weeks ago about a 'Police Community Support Officer' attempting illegally to stop a citizen from filming in a public place. Now I have come across a lengthier video which includes a brief excerpt from the previous video-footage plus several additional examples of police, security officers and police community support officers similarly attempting to prevent citizens from going about their lawful business and filming in public spaces. In one glaring example of police harrassment and attempted inditimdation (attempted, because the person doing the filming is gloriously unintimidated) the police actually tresspass on the private property of the person doing the filming and attempt to prevent him filming what is going on. When their initial attempts do not succeed, one of the officers (the male) makes contact with the police station using his 'walkie talkie' to ask for guidance and to report the 'crime' he perceives is being committed. Whilst he is doing this the female officer continues to 'bluster' and 'puff' at the person making the film. Whatever the male officer has been told by the police station, when he completes his call, he simply walks away and the female officer follows him:



(thru Amperss Rants)

These incidents now seem to be so common that I wonder just what police officers, police community support officers and security personnel are being told during their training sessions and 'briefings'! It is quite obvious that, when challenged, they back down because they know they are acting way beyond their lawful powers. How many cases occur, though, when they get away with their tactics of intimidation against perfectly law-abiding citizens? I was brought up to regard the police as 'my friend', a sentiment that was fostered by the comforting television programmes of my childhood such as Dixon of Dock Green, with his benevolent 'clips around the ear' for misbehaving children and friendly homilies to round off each episode. Much as it pains me and saddens me to write this, I cannot any longer say that the police and other authority figures are 'my friend' in all circumstances; a vigilant citizenry must make sure that its 'protectors' are not permitted to become, little by little, its 'oppressors'.

Police State Britain - attempts at illegal intimidation

Here is a startling example of two Metropolitan Police Officers (perhaps they were 'Community Police', but their yellow hi-vi jackets bear the logo of the Met) attempting to inditimidate a member of the public into stopping him making a video recording in the street. There is no law in Britain which forbids the taking of still or moving pictures in any public place by anyone who cares to. The situation is quite different when one is in what is deemed to be 'private property', but a public thoroughfare does not fall into this category. At the beginning you will see one of the police officers (the one who speaks the most, the other one remains alsmost silent throughout the whole encounter) attempt physically to stop the filming and when challenged why he has 'assaulted' the camera-holder reels off a string of meaningless verbiage. At one one, later in the account, when again challencged to justify why he is attempting to stop the filming and under which law, he responds "Shut Up!". He suggests, bizarrely, at one point that the filming is 'suspicious' because the person doing the filming is not a tourist, implying that for a tourist to do it would not be 'suspicious'.

When it became quite clear the two policemen weren't going to be able to intimidate the person into stopping filming, they walked away. Surely the police, of all people, should know the law and what they may or may not do legitimately? No doubt there will be cases when it will be a fine judgement whether an offence is being committed, but this is not one of those cases. It is quite clearly an attempt by the police to take the law into their own hands with no justification whatsoever. See what you think:



It requires a certain amount of courage, and a reasonable understanding of the law, to stand up to authority when challenged. It is necessary sometimes for citizens to make very clear that actions by figures of authority which go beyond lawful limits will not be tolerated.
(thru the devil's kitchen in turn through Tom Paine of The Last Ditch)