As far as I know this law has been used to detain and question activists only once before at a sea port so has rarely been used by police against activists. Two of us were detained last night on flying back from Oslo and arriving at Birmingham and I feel that it is important that other activists are aware of these extraordinary police powers and how to avoid them intruding where they really should not. I and my companion were released after a few hours of what they called “examination” and we did talk to lawyers and there was a bit of comedy value to the whole farce so it was not all bad BUT they can stop and question ANYONE they want so be prepared all who wish to enter the UK whatever your beliefs are, whatever your activism entails.
We walked through the passport bit and were stopped by a Detective Constable called Jack 3876 and a woman 1245 from West Midlands police who wanted to know our names and addresses and occupations, where we had been, what we had done, who we had met etc. A little bemused by the questioning I stopped answering at “occupation” (let alone who, what why, where...) and lo and behold they decided that they had suspicions and that they wanted a more cosy little chat we were taken to a desk and told to fill in cards which included information about name, address, date of birth etc. We filled in what we could (ie not al lot)and then came questions about how we paid for flights. They then looked at my credit card which is a Visa and has for many years paid some small amount to Amnesty International and has the AI logo on it. They really did not like this saying that caring about human rights was suspicious and we were detained under the Terrorism Act 2000 and separated for questioning.
For those who are not aware PACE does not apply in this instance. It appears (as this has not been challenged in court) that the detained person commits an offence under this act if s/he refuses to answer any questions and they were getting quite cross with me when I did not “cooperate” almost shouting “you HAVE to answer”. For those who utter the mantra “if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to worry about” the questions included asking about my parents details, if I had any children, work, colleagues, friends, if I had a partner, any drug addictions, religious beliefs all in all far beyond the remit of preventing terrorism and well into the realms of a gigantic fishing expedition coupled with threats of prolonged incarceration. I was under the distinct impression that if I did answer a question about for example my mother that it would lead to many more questions of a personal nature so I refused to play that little game.
First they tried to intimidate by saying that if I did not answer questions that they would hold me for 9 hours, then arrest me under the Terrorism Act and hold me for 48 hours then apply to a magistrate and hold me for 7 days. This was followed by an emphasis on the fact that unlike under PACE I was not entitled to free legal advice with them implying that it would cost a fortune to access a lawyer. I demanded one anyway (and would advise others to do the same money can be raised afterwards) and spoke to a good human rights lawyer who helped me as much as he was able. They can (if a Superintendant believes it is appropriate) refuse ANY access to a lawyer or 48 hours, I was apparently not entitled to a private conversation with my lawyer, police were present at all times, if PACE applied it would have been breached. As the attempts at intimidation did not work and Gene Hunt declined an appearance it was then on to sympathising with animal rights (ohh I HATE fur etc etc ad infinitum). This then went on to trying to provoke anger which consisted of getting out all my T shirts and taking the piss out of some of the sentiments written on them for example “what’s wrong with angling?” using a rather mocking tone and then writing down all the slogans they seemed to like the SPEAK T’shirt especially and were at one stage going to keep it, runners up were the WARN hoodie and a CAFT T’shirt which I admit has a naughty word on it! This was rather amusing it has to be said.
They were interested in who I knew, who the organisers of the organisation are (what organisation? you may ask dear reader and no I don’t know either), religion, philosophy, who I had met and lots of other stuff. None of this was taped our little chum Jack just wrote down his questions my “no comment”, silences and occasional answers to questions which I believed harmed no one for example no I am not a drug addict, no I do not have any bombs or stuff. Now those who enjoy a good rant could have all sorts of fun if careful pertaining to beliefs and obsessions such as being a Jedi or something but I was good and did not indulge in this sort of fun, it would have been cruel. I was ever more conscious that answering any questions about others was not only utterly unethical (ie grassing) but would lead to many more questions. For example say I had said in answer to a question “who did you meet?” and I had said “Bill”, they would have had a whole new avenue of questioning about Bill his Mum, his Mum’s goldfish and what they have for dinner, what time and all his associates, and all their associates and so on and so on. Logic decreed that they were probably pushing their boundaries to the legal limits and that if I wanted to get out that giving the police the infinite boring details about my life and everyone else I know was not the sensible way to do it.
The police have kept my mobile phone, they have also photocopied every piece of paper credit card receipts, notebook and diary in retrospect it was not too clever to have such things so easily accessible but I am sure that it is possible that if my sim card was hidden that they might have gone looking for it. I should imagine that they would have got really excited if I had a laptop on me. I was given a pat down search and not strip searched. I was only held for a couple of hours and a file might be going to the CPS to say that I was uncooperative which might be an offence.
The information word for word given to me is reptyped below (the scanner is not working).
“THE TERRORISM ACT 2000
Notice of Examination
General
This notice is to inform you that you are being questioned under the provisions of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000 as someone whose presence at the port of Birmingham is believed to be connected with entering or leaving Great Britain or Northern Ireland or travelling by air within Northern Ireland or Great Britain. This in itself does not necessarily mean that the examining officer who is questioning you suspects that you are a person who is, or has been, concerned in the commission , preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. The purpose of the questioning is to enable him to determine whether you appear to be such a person.
Your duties
You have a duty to be truthful and to give the examining officer all the information in your possession which the officer requests. You must also give to him , if he so requests, a valid passport, or other document which establishes your identity. You must also declare whether you have with you any documents o a kind specified by the officers, and if he so requests, give them to him. The Examining officer may also search your luggage.
The examining officer may, for the purpose of examination, detain any document which you have given to him, or anything found during a search of your luggage, for a period not exceeding 7 days (beginning with the day on which the detention commenced).
You may also be asked, or have been asked, to complete and hand to the officer an arrival or embarkation card. If so you have a duty to comply with that request.
If you deliberately fail to comply with any of these duties, you could be prosecuted under paragraph 18(1) of Schedule 7 to the Terrorism Act 2000.
Your Rights
You may, if you so request, have someone close to you, or known to you or likely to take an interest in your welfare informed that you are being questioned and where you are. You can do this at public expense. You may also consult a solicitor, wither in person, in writing or by telephone. If you do not wish to make a request now you can still do so later at any time.
Detention
The examining officer also has the authority to detain you, if necessary, for up to 9 hours from the time your examination began.
The Terrorism Act 2000
Notice of Detention
To ...........
You have been detained under the provisions of Schedule 7 paragraph 6 of the Terrorism Act 2000, so that an Examining Officer may exercise his power under paragraph 2 to determine if you are a person who has been involved in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.
Do you want someone informed?
You may, if you wish at public expense, have a friend, a relative, a person who is known to you, or is likely to take an interest in your welfare, informed that you are being detained here. Under the provisions of Schedule 8, para 8 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or Schedule 8, para 16 in Scotland, an officer of at least the rank of Superintendent may delay this right for up to 48 hours.
Do you want to contact a solicitor?
You may consult either in person, in writing or on the telephone, privately with a solicitor. If you do not wish to do so now, you may do so later and at any time while you are detained. Under the provisions of Schedule 8 para 8 of the Terrorism Act 2000 or Schedule 8, para 16 in Scotland, an officer of at least the rank of Superintendant may delay this right for up to 48 hours.”
So there we are a nice little loophole for the police to exploit away from the watchful eye of PACE to bully and harass those they decree are subversives. The main issue is that no activist should endanger themselves or another to escape what would appear to be a minor charge as it is summary with a maximum sentence of 3 months. I suspect few have been stopped like this but a strategy is needed and activists either returning to the UK or visiting need not to be frightened or paranoid but mentally prepared . Comments, advice, feedback etc would be most welcome.
In Oslo FIT were present and working with Norwegian police i.e Sergeant Sully from the Met’ CO996 and a South Yorkshire cop from Barnsley police station 1818. Both are well known to animal rights activists and have been on many other demos eg Climate Camp. The police state is ever more oppressive.
Oh by the way DC 1245 was absolutely right I have put this up on the internet, sorry to be so predictable but there you are, it is only fair to warn people that first of all the police do have extraordinary powers at ports , secondly that these powers appear not yet to have been fully challenged and thirdly that however grim this may appear that there is no reason to furnish the police with information which is beyond their remit. There is no reason to tell the police personal stuff about self or anything at all about other people.
Lynn Sawyer
Comments
Hide the following 17 comments
See also...
01.07.2009 18:27
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/08/346744.html
Which is linked from this feature article:
Indymedia and British Intelligence Services
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2007/02/361290.html
Chris
not correct
01.07.2009 19:49
Wiki
The Border computer
01.07.2009 20:21
I arrived at heathrow from a EU country.
At the border the guards were giving people a quick look at their passports and waving them through.
When I arrived at the border desk..the guard put my Passport in a machine ( I do NOT have a biometric passport ) At this point the guard's eyes opened wide as Stuff was coming up on the computer screen, The guard's eyes scrolling down the page .
As I was on the other side of the desk, I could not see the screen.
I was then ' allowed ' to enter UK.
Does anyone know what the border computer holds.
I know a few months back all passenger movements have been recorded.
But it seems there was more than just my travel itenery.
I've searched the internet high and low and find anything on this subject. Cant find a thing.!
Any Clues, any links ?
Big Joe
Thanks for the info
01.07.2009 20:25
Lynn Sawyer
You did say comments are welcome
01.07.2009 21:29
Well, not every member of Amnesty gets this sort of hassle, it's because your name is known as an activist. The fact you are obviously one of the most peaceable and reasonable posters here does indicate this could happen to anyone though so it is good you posted this. It is obviously a lot more hassle if somone has further connecting flights or prepaid journeys, or other appointments to keep, that they make you miss.
It is safe to say they already knew everything on your mobile phone so don't worry about that in this instance. I would buy a new one now though if you still intend using a mobile. If you are carrying sensitive data, such as a journal, don't. Either encrypt it and email it to a new account and then burn the original, or publish it anonymously on some random website you can retrieve it from later. Even then, only post reminders not the full documents as you can't trust the PC you'll be using and most people can't trust their own ability to encrypt securely.
Don't crack jokes with policemen unless you have plenty time on your hands, irony and sarcasm insults them and gives them the excuse to lock you up, besides there are probably more of them claim to be Jedi than activists who do. You have to bear in mind nearly all of the police or agents that you deal with will consider themselves to be decent people doing a worthwhile job which is more important than your welfare. The main thing you disagree about is whether a moral duty outweighs a legal duty. That knowledge allows you to negotiate with them how much you information you are willing to share about yourself whether you consider they have the right to be asking or not.
Bear in mind that their 'intelligence' about you will be written and mostly anonymous, in that they won't be able to distinguish between the ramblings of a commericially motivated Walt like Adrian Radford from more sensible supposition from intelligent intelligence agents.
Since most people incriminate themselves then no comment is easiest but I would happily debate philosophy with any state employee. It helps you learn about their suppositions. If you have confidence in your own motivation and no prejudice against the official, then saying things like 'I am not carrying drugs or bombs' is very sensible. Ask them why they want to know about Bob, and if they are sure that they don't in fact mean a different Bob.
One last thing to bear in mind is this didn't start in 2001, in Security Clearance jobs you were always dealt crap like this. In the early '90's I was asked at an interview why I had driven there in a car with a sticker from 'the terrorist group Greenpeace', in fact I drove straight into what turned out to be a military base without stopping at the open gatehouse. I replied 'It is not my car or stickers, but Greenpeace are hardly terrorists compared to the French government which blew up the Rainbow Warrior'. I got offered the job, testing missiles, despite that as I deflected the blame onto the French, and the UK SS hate the French SS. I turned it down as it hadn't been advertised as a military job, and I doubt I could get away with that today. Activists entering the UK or US today should take the same precautions that you would do entering North Korea or any other police state, perhaps more so given the extra technology in use.
Danny
The return of Hitlerism
01.07.2009 23:18
Sad.
Keith Harris
fuck the police
02.07.2009 12:16
@
link to previous report
02.07.2009 15:25
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/04/396863.html
Thanks Lynn for bringing this to people's attention; I for one wasn't aware of it. And well done for sticking up to them and refusing to answer in spite of the legal threats.
According to this guide:
http://www.geocities.com/mutmainaa/active/know_rights_2000.html
..."The information or documents the examining officer can seek must only be to do with establishing whether you ‘appear to be a person’ who is or has been ‘concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism’. [...] The lawfulness of such a broad range of questions has not yet been challenged."
So in practice they use this denial of the right to silence to try and intimidate you into answering all sorts of irrelevant questions, but if they prosecuted you afterwards you might have a good defence in arguing that the questions being asked were irrelevant to determining whether you are a terrorist.
I'd love to research this more, find out if anyone has ever actually been prosecuted for refusing to answer questions put in these circumstances (ie under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000), and whether such a defence has been tried, but I don't have time right now..
PS Don't worry about the crude attempts at trolling; most activists will see through such divisive bollocks.
-
Thanks
02.07.2009 17:45
I doubt very much that if a file is sent to the CPS that this will go to court, if so it is about time this was challenged anyway the maximum penalty is 3 months in prison.
Needless to say at least I was able to speak English, speak to a lawyer, get my friends informed and have some idea that this was an idle threat. A refugee who speaks no English, is terrified of the police, no friends outside and has everything to lose would be incredibly vulnerable in this situation. It is important to not take this crap not only for ourselves but for everyone as we are in a position of privelege compared to many who are oppressed by British cops at the borders.
Lynn Sawyer
white middle class activists in their own world, oblivious to what's around them
02.07.2009 20:24
ACAB
Shark vs Crocodile
02.07.2009 21:01
The current UK/US persecution list seems to be in this order:
1 Muslim activists
2 Muslims in general
3 Any AR activists
4 Serious Eco activists
5 Serious Peace Protestors
and that top five was very different 20 years ago.
People who don't make the persecution list are safe middle-class white atheists/Christians/Jews who sometimes complain of 'oppression' but as often as not ridicule such claims. And from personal experience, they are the dodgiest, most dangerous people on IM.
Danny
ACAB WTF?
02.07.2009 21:50
Get over yourself.
By the way I am interested in how this legislation has been used against any individual, can you enlighten me without endangering others?
Lynn Sawyer
I was stopped too!
03.07.2009 11:50
Phil Webb
Phil Webb
e-mail: antichrist1988@hotmail.com
PACE does not apply, but this does
03.07.2009 12:27
http://security.homeoffice.gov.uk/news-publications/publication-search/terrorism-act-2000/Code-of-Practice-for-Examin1.pdf?view=Binary
Exam Bored
Not just airports
03.07.2009 13:05
I do notice however that there are people who I shan't name on this thread who are telling a pack of lies about their experiences, and are themselves believed to have been recruited.
Oh, the irony.
Chris de Burgh's biggets fan
Targets
04.07.2009 18:46
They'll have targets to meet, like traffic wardens, to justify their funding. Any Capitalist state function has it's own in-built profit motive.
Danny
Hard Cell
06.07.2009 13:11
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/exclusive-how-mi5-blackmails-british-muslims-1688618.html
Perhaps if they had done their jobs properly and busted Tony Blair for war crimes and MI6 for terrorism, people would have had more respect for them and they wouldn't have to trepan conscripts like some bunch of pirates.
I think these creepy bastards should pick up a histriy book and read all about the Gestapo, the Stasi, the KGB, the NKVD and ask themselves if acting like a fascist dictatorship is what they signed up for.
Chris de Burgh's biggets fan