Photo protest challenges "draconian" terror laws

The act of photographing people or places around the UK has become trickier in recent years for amateurs and professionals alike. Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 gives police the power to stop and search anyone in a given area, while Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 threatens a prison term of up to ten years for snapping police, armed forces and intelligence services.

Professionals have also become irritated at the level of control imposed in "pseudo-public spaces" such as Canary Wharf. So at a few minutes after 3pm, a group of them turned up just under the clocks and began clicking away in defiance.

Freelance photographer Jess Hurd co-organised the event under the banner I'm A Photographer, Not A Terrorist.

She said: "The public need to be aware of these restrictions on the media.

"Police seem to have learned their lesson from the last climate camp. I received an apology from Kent Police for being stopped several times and then filmed through a coffee shop window. But things haven't really changed. One of our colleagues was recently arrested and held in the back of a van for several hours for taking a picture of an air ambulance.

"Police themselves say the new legislation has been badly drafted and have told us they're not using it. It's been threatened, but we will challenge it every time."

The theme of the protest was simple. Sympathisers were encouraged to pop down to the Wharf, pull out their camera, and just snap away. Security did not intervene during the protest, which had been known to Canary Wharf Group several weeks in advance. Protesters were left to mill around, waving miniature I'm A Photographer, Not A Terrorist placards, often taking pictures of other people taking pictures.

While the "flash-mob" gathering itself was good-natured, many who attended were deadly serious about their opposition to current restrictions.

Janine Wiedel, freelance photographer and documentary film-maker, said: "I've been a photographer for 35 years and things are just getting tighter and tighter.

"People are getting more and more uptight about their image being taken because they think it's going to end up on the internet somewhere, but it's the people that are clicking away with their mobiles that they need to be careful of.

"It's very dangerous when you clamp down on photographing police as well. You end up with a police state.

"I accept that people have the right to privacy but it's just gone too far."

Canary Wharf Group told The Wharf three weeks ago that it was "happy" to welcome tourist, student and amateur photographers to the estate, but that it required professionals to apply for a permit to "minimise disruption".

However, amateurs have run into trouble while taking pictures in "private" areas with expensive equipment.

Amateur photographer David Miller said: "I had a long conversation with a security guard on the Scoop in South Bank.

"He insisted I was a professional and needed a permit, while I was surrounded by hundreds of tourists snapping away. It was just because I had a big camera. He then suggested that maybe I was a spy, but then if I was a spy I'd be a bit more subtle about it.

"There's a lot of paranoia about. People have their cameras interfered with by security guards, just for trying to take pictures. The argument that restricting photography will somehow stop terrorism is just an excuse to impose restraints."

While many of the professional photographers had stories about their treatment at the hands of police, most were especially angry at the approach of private security guards.

Architectural photographer Grant Smith's job involves taking pictures of buildings for the architects who designed them, but even he frequently finds himself subject to checks and "threats".

He has often been accused of "hostile reconnaissance", a term used to describe the method of gathering data for a terrorist strike.

The City of London Police's website urges the public to call the 999 emergency number to report anyone acting suspiciously, which includes snapping pictures "for no apparent reason", taking notes outside premises or wearing "inappropriate clothing" while trying to enter a building.

It claims: "Reconnaissance is considered to be an integral part of operational activity for terrorists. Evidence suggests that hostile reconnaissance activity will be undertaken prior to any attack."

Grant Smith believes this fear is "abused", leading to excessive policing of photography in built-up areas.

He said: "The counter terrorism argument has been regularly abused. It's become much worse in the last couple of years.

"I've got three section 44s in three weeks. It's precipitated by security guards who say you can't photograph, even though it's a public highway. If you stand your ground, they call the police and they accuse you of 'hostile reconnaissance'.

"You can be there for half an hour or even five minutes and security will pounce and say: 'Don't do that'. I've been threatened before. Once I was attended by five police officers, three of them armed.

"I've been an architectural photographer for 20 years. I was doing a film of the Gherkin for a client, and I was on the site every other week as it went up. I had a tripod with one leg inside the precinct and someone came down to make me move it an inch back.

"It's done in such a heavy-handed and obnoxious way. Police tend to know what they're doing most of the time, but I have a lot of problems with security guards.

"I was once trying to take a picture of a rather beautiful Wren spire on a church, and I had my back to the Merrill Lynch building next to it. A guy came up and asked me what I was doing. It's a proper public space, and they must have their cameras trained on that churchyard.

"It's corporate bullying. London is a beautiful city and by photographing it you're celebrating that. I want that freedom, and I think the thousands of tourists that visit London every year would want it too."

Go to photographernotaterrorist.org for more details