Independent: I'm suing the police because they labelled me an extremist and barred me from doing my work

Andy

Andy

Retired committee member
Talks about a journalist labelled by the police as an extremist which then affected his ability to work. Posting due to ME advocates being labelled as extremists in the past - seemed a similar principle to me.
I couldn’t quite believe it was happening when I took a seat in the High Court in London on Wednesday afternoon. A room full of lawyers were preparing to make their arguments; page after page of legal documents setting out their respective cases.

This might not sound out of the ordinary for legal proceedings, except it all feels somewhat different when the case bears your name. I wasn’t on trial, quite the opposite: this was an attempt by me to hold the police accountable for their actions. And yet I felt as though I was present to defend myself, despite never having been arrested, charged or convicted of a criminal offence.

I was asking a judge to grant me permission to sue two police forces, after they distressingly labelled me an “extremist” and restricted my ability to conduct my work as a member of the press.

It all started in September last year, when I was informed that the police had decided I couldn’t attend the Labour Party Conference in Brighton. I applied to attend as a journalist, which is my full-time job. The Labour Party was expecting me to be present, but the police then let me know that I could not attend.
Click to expand...
https://www.independent.co.uk/voice...conference-democracy-journalist-a8334926.html
 
The policy, which we’ve now forced the police to show us, makes for uncomfortable reading: immigration status, mental health, activism and “fixation” (whatever that means) are all listed as potential reasons to ban someone from attending events.
Click to expand...

Bolding mine.

Lovely. So when the establishment has stuck a mental health label on us all, they can then prevent us from participating from attending events.

Instead of posturing about how people want to avoid being labelled as mentally ill because of the stigma, you should try and do something about the stigma itself, Simon Wessely.

Becoming mentally ill does not mean someone is more prone to violence or becoming disruptive. Being prevented from participating in one's community is hardly conducive to promoting mental health.

Sickening state sanctioned discrimination.

Edited cause I managed to insert my comment into the quote.
 
This all comes from the police being allowed to keep databases of what they call 'domestic extremists'. There is no such thing in law as 'domestic extremist', and the important point is that you don't have to have committed a crime to be included.

Extracted-slide.jpg


Slide from Merseyside Police 'Prevent' presentation (in house document).

The Network for Police Monitoring is currently bringing a case to the First-Tier Tribunal (Information Rights) about this. Rejecting their appeal of the FOI request:

Despite the general principle that public bodies are “motive blind” when releasing information, the Commissioner accepted arguments from each force that “disclosure could lead to groups or individuals who could be characterised as having an ‘anti-Prevent’ agenda, seeking to discredit or undermine the training materials”. In an extraordinary statement, she added:

“There are individuals and groups who question its approach… and some are openly hostile to it. Amongst the latter are groups that have campaigned against it. The Commissioner accepts that such groups are likely to seek to highlight in response to disclosure what they regard as flaws or particularly controversial aspects of the training materials.”
Click to expand...

https://netpol.org/2018/05/01/home-office-wrap-training-prevent/

There is currently an 'independent' inquiry into the activities of undercover police spies (currently collapsing due to the way the inquiry is being run).
https://www.leighday.co.uk/News/News-2018/May-2018/Statement-from-Peter-Francis

The Metropolitan Police, his employers at the time of his deployment, issued an apology to women who were abused by other SDS officers:

“It has become apparent that some officers, acting undercover whilst seeking to infiltrate protest groups, entered into long-term intimate sexual relationships with women which were abusive, deceitful, manipulative and wrong.”

Assistant Commissioner Martin Hewitt went on to say: “I acknowledge that these relationships were a violation of the women’s human rights, an abuse of police power and caused significant trauma,” and “relationships like these should never have happened. They were wrong and were a gross violation of personal dignity and integrity.”

Lawyers for the Met have acknowledged more recently that these relationships violated women’s human rights, including ‘Article 3’ (i.e. the right to “freedom from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment”). This is an ‘absolute’ right, which should not be breached in any circumstances.
Click to expand...
(SDS - Special Demonstration Squad)

https://policespiesoutoflives.org.u...med-as-being-councillor-andy-coles/#more-4163
https://policespiesoutoflives.org.uk

Remember when the Science Media Centre was getting advice from police who had experience with animal right's groups? What was said about us during the PACE FOI tribunal?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom