Kent Police have come in for more criticism over their handling of last year’s Climate Camp rally after it emerged number-plate technology was used to monitor protestors.
Officers set up cameras on roads surrounding Kingsnorth power station on the Hoo Peninsula so the details of motorists could be logged and checked against a national database.
The force says this was to stop stolen, uninsured and dangerous vehicles, but documents released this week under the Freedom of Information Act suggest these were not the only motives.
One file in particular – a police letter to Medway Council about the authority’s initial reluctance to help install the cameras – implies their use was for more than simply reducing road crime.
Written by Sgt Keith Waymont, it read: “When I put this to my bosses they were less than impressed, given the importance of this operation as the new power station build is likely to create a considerable number of jobs for Medway.”
Medway councillor Mark Reckless (Con), who is also a member of the Kent Police Authority that is tasked with holding the force to account, described Sgt Waymont’s letter as “utterly unacceptable”.
He added: “By pressuring the council to set aside our concerns about planned police surveillance in this way implies the Climate Camp policing was intended to face down the protestors and help E.ON build a new power station.
“To the best of my knowledge this is not true. In some aspects of the operation the police went out of their way to demonstrate neutrality, for example by not using E.ON facilities to command the operation.
“However, the unveiling of this letter can only add to concerns regarding the policing of the protest.”
The environmental rally at Kingsnorth last summer was over E.ON’s plans to build a new coal-fired power station, which last month the company put on hold for up to three years.
Politicians, protestors and academics involved in the demonstration have always claimed the police response – which included the extensive use of stop-and-search powers – was disproportionate to the threat posed by the 1,500 activists.
Officers were also accused of being heavy-handed with the campaigners, seizing hundreds of personal items including soap, board games and a clown costume, and using sleep deprivation tactics – such as broadcasting The Clash hit I Fought the Law in the early hours.
Responding to the latest revelations about the use of ANPR technology, Medway MP Bob Marshall-Andrews (Lab) said: “The way in which the police acted at the demonstrations has alienated hundreds, if not thousands of peaceful and law-abiding citizens.
“As for the letter to the council about the power station creating new jobs, the police may individually be concerned about things like that but they should certainly not be expressing their views in this way.”
Kent Police has so far invested £5.3 million in its ANPR system, which draws on information from a variety of national databases and flags up vehicles of interest in the blink of an eye.
Chief Insp Richard Watson heads a team that specialises in using the equipment, and earlier this year told KOS Media: “There are people who say it’s like Big Brother, but I would have no need to look at your car if you were not involved in criminal activity.”
And in an interview with Yourkenttv in November last year, Chief Constable Mike Fuller said: “Law-abiding people have nothing to fear from this.”
However, according to The Guardian officers have been told they can place ‘markers’ against the vehicles of anyone who attends demonstrations regardless of whether or not they have committed a crime.
James Welch, legal director of the civil rights group Liberty, said: “When ANPR was first introduced it was said it would only be used to identify unlicensed and uninsured vehicles.
“Now we see it being used for a myriad of purposes without any public debate.
“Using it to mark cars associated with peaceful protestors interferes with an important democratic right and would seem to come pretty close to harassment.”
Responding to the criticism, Chief Insp Watson said it was common practice to use ANPR at key locations where there is a large volume of vehicles – such as the Dartford crossing – to help reduce the number of people killed or seriously injured on Kent’s roads.
He added that 45 drivers who attended the Climate Camp protests were found to have no insurance, tax or licence, and all records from the demonstration would be kept for two years before being deleted.
In regards to the letter by Sgt Waymont, Chief Insp Watson said: “There was a lack of understanding of the partnership process with one person at the local authority.
“Once that had been made clear by their supervisor, there was no issue with our use of Medway’s facilities.”
A Medway Council spokeswoman said: “Reducing crime rates is of paramount importance to the council and its partners – including the police – and we will continue to support the work of the police and, wherever possible, come to a mutual agreement on all policies.”
An official report into policing at the 10-day protest criticised the force’s blanket use of stop and search as "disproportionate and counterproductive".
More than 8,000 searches were carried out on protestors by the more than 1,400 officers drafted in from 24 forces for the £5.3m police operation.
The police also put journalists covering the protest under surveillance, and blasted-out a message from a low-flying helicopter at a group including families saying that if they did not disperse police horses, dogs and long-handled batons would be "used against them".
POSTED: 01/11/2009 09:00:00
Bookmark with:
Email to a friend: