Photography of Police officers in London - allowed

<p>I can't see any other thread referencing this, perhaps I'm the first.</p>

<p>The Metropolitan Police issues advice to its officers that photography on the streets of the capital - including photography of Police Officers, is not a criminal offence or of itself evidence of terrorist activity. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm">http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm</a></p>

<p>Thanks to the Register for the tip-off. </p>

 

<p>Thanks for this Alec. Is it new guidance?</p>

<p>It's not a change in the law - it's the Met reminding its officers of how the law stands, then issuing a press release and web-page to say they've done so. This follows a certain amount of controversy about some photographers being harassed, and also the policing of the recent G8 summit in London and attendant protests.</p>

There's another thread happening at the Causal Photo Conversation forum called

<a href="http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00TtGI?unified_p=1">The plight of UK photographers.</a><br>

 

Heres again is my entry there:

<p>Here's something from the magazine Amateur Photographer:

<b><a href="http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Mets_photography_advice_not_Home_Office_approved_news_285926.html"> Met's photography advice not Home Office approved.</a></b><br><br>

 

..and the article from The Guardian:

<b><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/jul/09/photography-anti-terrorism-regulations" >The Met's attack on photographers.</b><i> The police take on anti-terrorism laws is creating a hostile environment for photography in London's public space.</i></p>

<p>Alec, thanks for posting this link. I had heard a few months ago from someone in the Met Police that the Met had issued an an internal briefing to all their officers reminding them of the legal situation - most importantly that the Terrorism Act and Counter-Terrorism Act cannot be used to stop photographers unless there is a genuine and reasonable belief that an act of terrorism or hostile reconnaissance is happening and that the exlanation given by the photographer was not adequate. It is clear that the bad publicity arising from the spate of stupid incidents where policce have exceeded their powers has hit the mark. Let us hope that officers on the ground take the message of their own police service to heart. Meanwhile I think the best thing to do if stopped photographing by an over-zealous constable is to say, 'OK, constable, let us all go down to the nick and discuss this with your sergeant where we can all refer to this Met Police advice on the subject.'</p>

<p>I think the majority of Met police officers have always known the powers given them under this legislation and it is only the slower ones who are not clear about it. Let's hope these guys are catching up.</p>

<p>Just as a matter of curiosity, would it do any good at all to tell a police officer to "please get out of the picture?"</p>

<p>I am glad to see someone is starting to clear the waters on this. It's a shame they have not gone as far as the New York (?) memo that specifically states the police have no right to confiscate equipment or to request deletion of photographs but hopefully this will start to coll things down a bit where that is not a problem.</p>

<p>There are always going to be idiots in uniform and all the advice in the world will not penetrate their heads, unfortunately.</p>

<p>Colin's advice is good but perhaps you ought to change "sergeant" to "Divisional Commander". I had to raise an issue about something unrelated to photography with a regional force and found that a call to the Divisional Commander's office lit a very large rocket under the offender's backside.</p>

<p>99% of British police officers are genuine people doing a nasty job. Taking nonsense from the other 1%, <br /> instead of standing on their toes until they apologise, is <em>not</em> doing the rest any favours, in my experience.</p>

<p>I'll sound mighty impressive now that I can quote this</p>