Well respected photojournalist pursues complaint to the IPCC after being stopped whilst working by police who tell her we can do anything under the terrorism act
Publication date: 11 December 2009
Ms Jess Hurd, a well known and highly respected photojournalist has made a formal complaint to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (‘IPCC’) after officers from the Metropolitan Police Service stopped her under terrorist legislation when she was working in a professional capacity covering a wedding on 10th December 2008 at the Ramada Hotel in London Docklands. Despite the officers being fully aware of her status as an accredited photo journalist and Ms Hurd explaining her presence and offering her identifying Press Card, she was still questioned and her footage viewed by officers, purportedly interested in her as a potential terrorist.
The incident raises a number of grave concerns to Ms Hurd, the National Union of Journalists (‘NUJ’) and its members generally, since she was apparently targeted purely because she was filming in the London Docklands, although in the most innocuous of circumstances; at a hotel wedding reception.
The NUJ has instructed Ms Chez Cotton, Head of the Police Misconduct department of leading civil rights firm Bindmans LLP to pursue the complaint on Ms Hurd’s behalf.
The basis of the complaint is summarised below:
Police officers, who were aware that a wedding reception was taking place at the hotel in London Docklands and had seen Ms Hurd filming guests as they were leaving, approached her to see ‘what she was doing’. Although Ms Hurd could see no legitimate reason for their interest, she wished to co-operate and resolve matters swiftly, and explained to the officers that she had been professionally engaged to cover the wedding and was an accredited photojournalist. She offered her Press Card so that her credentials could be checked by the police, there being in force nationally agreed Guidelines between the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and media organisations (see resources at the end of the press release). Each accredited NUJ member has a unique PIN number and photographic ID, and the police have access to a 24 hour ‘hotline’ that they can call to verify the personal details and identity of a legitimate member of the press. The Guidelines set out that the police will recognise the holder of a valid
Press Card, issued by the UK Press Card Authority Limited, as ‘a bona fide news gatherer’. The Guidelines are comprehensive and should be known and followed by all police officers.
Ms Hurd told she could be doing ‘hostile reconnaissance’
A second officer, aware of Ms Hurd’s status as a journalist and that her footage had been obtained through legitimate journalistic activity, said he wished to view the film. He said she was being stopped under ‘Section 44 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act’.
Ms Hurd protested that she was clearly a journalist and as the footage was professional they could not interfere. Ms Hurd was then told that she could have been ‘doing hostile reconnaissance’, although this was entirely at odds with the circumstances confirmed by Ms Hurd and supported by the evidence of the reality of the situation.
Camera forcibly taken
Ms Hurd’s camera was forcibly taken from her by the officer, despite her protests that there were safeguards in place to ensure a free press. The officer’s response was: “We can do anything under the terrorism act”.
Footage viewed
A third officer took the camera and watched footage with a further officer who was still in the police car, some distance from Ms Hurd. She was fearful that her entire days work could be wiped and was by now feeling intimidated, as she was in a dark car park being questioned in an intimidating way by police officers.
Told by police there would be ‘severe penalties’ if she used the footage, and that the police own the copyright
Ms Hurd was informed that she could not use any footage of the police car or police officers and that if she did there would be ‘severe penalties’, although these were not specified.
The officer concluded the matter confirming to Ms Hurd that if she did want to use the footage then she would have to go through the Metropolitan Police press office, as it was ‘his copyright’, and, although the officers were not undercover at that point, they might be at some point in the future.
What Ms Hurd seeks
Ms Hurd is seeking a full apology, confirmation that the officers involved have received training in relation to the appropriate use of S44 of the Terrorism Act and the responsibilities set out in the Association of Chief Police Officers (‘ACPO’) Police Media Guidelines (‘the Guidelines’), which are in force nationally, as well as any other measures considered appropriate given the many breaches of the Standards of Professional Behaviour, The Police (Conduct) Regulations 2008 arising from the treatment she has received.
Ms Hurd’s lawyer, instructed by the NUJ, Ms Chez Cotton, Head of the Police Misconduct Department at leading London law firm Bindmans LLP said:
“The police appear to have been interested in Ms Hurd only because she was filming and used S44 of the Terrorism Act where suspicion is not necessary to stop and search her, in full knowledge that she was a photojournalist. Ms Hurd had voluntarily explained her presence and provided identification that only accredited members of the press carry, which it is agreed that police forces nationally will recognise. Despite this, her footage was viewed for the most spurious of reasons and counter to basic principles of a free press. A Joint Committee for Human Rights report of July 2009 stated, ‘…we deplore the obvious overuse of Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 in recent years’. The treatment of Ms Hurd is a stark example of such misuse of S44 and made all the more serious because officers were fully aware of the status of Ms Hurd as an accredited photojournalist professionally engaged at the time of the use of the controversial provision.”
NUJ Legal Officer, Roy Mincoff said:
“It appears that for no good reason Jess Hurd was treated, and continued to be treated, as if she were a suspected terrorist. The NUJ considers The Police’s apparent failure to recognise the PressCard, and ignorance of ACPO Guidelines and lack of knowledge of the law to be unacceptable. We welcome more recent ACPO advice as to the role of the media and how legislation should be applied, and Ministerial assurances that anti-terrorism legislation must only be used for that purpose, given after considerable and continuous efforts by the NUJ to achieve that progress.
Now these issues must be addressed in practice by the Police.
We will be keeping very close sight of this and take such action as necessary should further breaches occur.”
Notes for editors
Further information
Ms Chez Cotton, Head of the Police Misconduct Department at Bindmans LLP, 275 Grays Inn Road, London WC1X 8QB www.bindmans.com is the solicitor with conduct of the case.
Journalists should contact Paula Fagan, Head of Marketing at Bindmans LLP for enquiries on Tel: 020 7833 7812. Email: p.fagan@bindmans.com
The journalist – Jess Hurd
Ms Jess Hurd is a member of the National Union of Journalists and a member of the International Federation of Journalists and the British Press Photographers’ Association. She has been a journalist since 1996 and has contributed to, amongst others, the following newspapers and magazines: The Times, The Times Education Supplement, The Guardian, The Financial Times and Newsweek.
Resources
Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) – Media Guidelines
(Nationally adopted in April 2007 having been first introduced by the Metropolitan Police in March 2006)
Members of the media are not only members of the public; they can influence the way the Metropolitan Police Service is portrayed. It is important that we build good relationships with them, even when the circumstances are difficult. They have a duty to report many of those things that we have to deal with – crime, demonstrations, accidents, major events and incidents. This guide is designed to help you take the appropriate action when you have to deal with members of the media.
Members of the media have a duty to report from the scene of many of the incidents we have to deal with. We should actively help them carry out their responsibilities provided they do not interfere with ours.
Where it is necessary to put cordons in place, it is much better to provide the media with a good vantage point from which they can operate rather than to exclude them, otherwise they may try to get around the cordons and interfere with police operations. Providing an area for members of the media does not exclude them from operating from other areas to which the general public has access.
Members of the media have a duty to take photographs and film incidents and we have no legal power or moral responsibility to prevent or restrict what they record. It is a matter for their editors to control what is published or broadcast, not the police. Once images are recorded, we have no power to delete or confiscate them without a court order, even if we think they contain damaging or useful evidence.
If someone who is distressed or bereaved asks for police to intervene to prevent members of the media filming or photographing them, we may pass on their request but we have no power to prevent or restrict media activity. If they are trespassing on private property, the person who owns or controls the premises may eject them and may ask for your help in preventing a breach of the peace while they do so. The media have their own rules of conduct and complaints procedures if members of the public object.
To help you identify genuine members of the media, they carry identification, which they will produce to you on request. Members of the media do not need a permit to photograph or film in public places.
To enter private property while accompanying police, the media must obtain permission, which must be recorded, from the person who owns or is in control of the premises. We cannot give or deny permission to members of the media to enter private premises whether the premises are directly involved in the police operation or not. This is a matter between the person who owns or is in control of the premises and the members of the media.
Giving members of the media access to incident scenes is a matter for the Senior Investigating Officer. The gathering of evidence and forensic retrieval make access unlikely in the early stages and this should be explained to members of the media. Requests for access should be passed to the Senior Investigating Officer who should allow access in appropriate cases as soon as practicable.
Advice and assistance in dealing with members of the media is available 24 hours a day via the Press Bureau at New Scotland Yard.
