Council puts CCTV in couple's bedroom
anon | 24.11.2008 14:43 | Bio-technology | Repression | Social Struggles
A couple with learning disabilities, living in a 'residential family centre', have had to invoke the Human Rights Act to have CCTV switched off in their bedroom at night.
A young couple living in a 'residential assesment centre' to asses their 'suitability' as parents, in which all the rooms are monitored by CCTV, have invoked the Human Rights Act to have the camera in their bedroom switched off at night.
The cameras are installed for the 'protection' of their baby, a baby that sleeps in a separate, monitored nursery from the bedroom.
The incident was documented in a report by the British Institute of Human Rights, which asserted that the bedroom camera was in direct breach of Article 8 of the declaration of Human Rights - respect for private and family life. The Government regulations for the residential centres also state that, although monitoring through listening devices and cameras is practiced and allowed, the privacy of the family has to be respected.
The local council in question has not been named.
The incident is being cited as the latest in a stream of gross violations of human privacy, dignity and freedom that have been facilitated by 'anti-terror' legislation. Even the Government has admitted that the use of these laws by local councils has 'gone too far', and amounts to spying on members of the public.
The cameras are installed for the 'protection' of their baby, a baby that sleeps in a separate, monitored nursery from the bedroom.
The incident was documented in a report by the British Institute of Human Rights, which asserted that the bedroom camera was in direct breach of Article 8 of the declaration of Human Rights - respect for private and family life. The Government regulations for the residential centres also state that, although monitoring through listening devices and cameras is practiced and allowed, the privacy of the family has to be respected.
The local council in question has not been named.
The incident is being cited as the latest in a stream of gross violations of human privacy, dignity and freedom that have been facilitated by 'anti-terror' legislation. Even the Government has admitted that the use of these laws by local councils has 'gone too far', and amounts to spying on members of the public.
anon