On Saturday just after 12 noon, two police officers stopped Alan Wen on his way to meet fellow climate campaigners outside the match. Mr Wen and his fellow campaigners had been planning to hand out leaflets to match-goers, explaining how E.ON, the sponsors of the FA Cup, are trying to build the UK’s first coal-fired power station in 30 years, which would have disastrous consequences for the climate [1]. Claiming to be acting under the London Local Authorities Act, the two police officers seized the flyers and T-shirts – all bearing the spoof logo “E.ON: F.OFF” – and demanded Mr Wen’s name and address, threatening to arrest him if he did not comply. In fact, the officers had no legal powers to do any of these things, and Mr Wen was not breaking any laws [2]. He is now considering making a formal complaint.

A spokesperson from the Camp for Climate Action’s legal team said: “Have the police learned nothing from the G20 protests? This was yet another disgraceful example of over-the-top policing, designed to prevent environmental protest from taking place. Why are the police abusing their powers to protect the profits of a giant energy corporation?”

This incident follows widespread public criticism of heavy-handed and aggressive police tactics at the April 1st G20 protests, as well as concern about inappropriate use of police surveillance and stop-and-search powers against environmental campaigners [3]. A report by the National Police Improvement Agency, thought to be critical of police tactics at last August’s Climate Camp protest at Kingsnorth power station, has been mysteriously kept out of the public domain [4]. Meanwhile, the Climate Camp’s legal team have slammed an upcoming review of the policing of protest by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC), branding it a “whitewash” and refusing to be involved.

In an email to the HMIC explaining their decision [5], the Climate Camp’s legal team said “If a truly independent, wide-reaching and influential public review of the policing of protest were to be launched, we would consider becoming involved. However, the HMIC review is likely to be a biased, toothless whitewash and so we believe that our time will be better spent campaigning against the root causes of climate change.”

The human rights organisation Liberty have similarly declined to be involved in the HMIC review.

ENDS

Notes for Editors

[1] German energy corporation E.ON have applied for Government permission to build the first new UK coal-fired plant in thirty years at Kingsnorth in Kent. If built, this
power station would produce the same amount of carbon dioxide as the world’s 30 least polluting countries combined. If – as the Government have suggested – the new power plant is fitted with a demonstration “carbon capture and storage” (CCS) device, this would only reduce its emissions by a quarter. This means that even if the technology worked (which is by no means certain), Kingsnorth would still be far more polluting than a gas power station – let alone a switch to wind, solar, tidal, or wave, or simply using less energy in the first place, all of which are viable alternatives.

[2] The London Local Authorities Act
(see  http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/localact1994/ukla_19940012_en_1#l1g4) gives police in London the power to confiscate literature “which advertises, or contains or comprises an advertisement, for commercial gain”. It only applies to commercial advertising and does NOT give police the power to seize campaign leaflets or T-Shirts. It is perfectly legal to distribute free leaflets in a public place so long as nothing is for sale. The Local Authorities Act also contains no provisions for police to search people to look for “free literature”, nor to take people’s names and addresses.

[3] See for example  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8061050.stm,  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/henryporter/2009/mar/12/protest-kingsnorth and  http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2009/apr/02/g20-climate-camp-protest-london-police-bishopsgate.

[4]  http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/05/police-shelve-review-on-kingsnorth-protest/

[5] The full text of the email to the HMIC is copied below:

(Sent Friday 29th May 2009)

Dear HMIC,

We are writing to formally reject your offer of discussing how we might be involved in the HMIC's "Review of the Policing of Public Protest".

The disgraceful police behaviour at the G20 protests this April was part of a worrying ongoing trend in the disproportionate and aggressive policing of protest. At the Camp for Climate Action at Kingsnorth in 2008 we encountered the indiscriminate use of stop and search powers, the mass confiscation of personal property, and aggressive behaviour by police officers on multiple occasions. There is a desperate need for a truly independent public review into the policing of protest - but this HMIC review will be no such thing, for the following reasons:

* Lack of independent membership: The HMIC is staffed largely by ex-police officers, and despite its claims of independence retains strong ties with both the Home Office and the police. It cannot be trusted to carry out a full and fair review of police tactics.

* Narrowness of scope: The proposed HMIC review aims to "Assess the effectiveness and impact of public order tactics" and "identify difficulties and barriers" to their "successful implementation". The closest it will come to critiquing these tactics will be to "examine the overall direction of public order goals, strategies and tactics" with relation to "the acknowledged principles of British policing". The review will not consider whether some or all of the tactics used by police at protests are in fact completely inappropriate. It also continues to consider protest as a form of public order offence - i.e. a form of criminality - rather than a vital democratic right in a free society.

* Lack of influence: Even if this review were, against all the odds, to produce a serious critique of police practices we have little faith that its findings will lead to any significant shift in policy or practice. As a case in point, a similar review by the NPIA into the policing of the Kingsnorth protest seems to have been buried without any public exposure.

If a truly independent, wide-reaching and influential public review of the policing of protest were to be launched, we would consider becoming involved. However, this HMIC review appears likely to be a biased, toothless whitewash and so we believe that our time will be better spent campaigning against the root causes of climate change. We note that the human rights organisation Liberty have similarly declined to be involved.

Yours sincerely,

The Camp for Climate Action Legal Team