Abuse of power part 6
As if hell bent on seeking to demonstrate the truth of the observations made in this series of articles, on December 30, 2008 police in Croydon used the Terrorism Act to stop and search a desperate character undertaking a highly suspicious activity. (Only kidding).
The person was Andrew Pelling, Conservative MP for Central Croydon. The suspicious activity was taking photos of a cycle path which he described as a "long-neglected bicycle and pedestrian route" within his constituency. As this path was close to the main railway station, two police officers stopped him using the Terrorism Act powers. An official police spokesman described the incident thus: "'The officer conducted a stop-and-search - taking into account the current terror threat - as he (obviously referring to the MP) was taking pictures in the vicinity of a major transport hub.". When they questioned Mr Pelling, he told them who he was, what he was doing, and produced his House of Commons pass. Notwithstanding all of this, they proceeded to search his bag. Since the police found nothing of any relevance, he was allowed to proceed on his way.
It is not that long ago that there was outrage in this country about what is thought to be the ludicrous situation of holidaymaking plane spotters being arrested in Greece for taking photographs. How absurd it was to regard such an ordinary activity as suspicious, was the general view. That sort of thing would never happen here, everyone thought. Whilst obviously Mr Pelling was not arrested, taking photographs of footpaths is even less suspicious. The problem is that if taking photographs of a footpath is regarded as suspicious, it is difficult to see what sort of activity would not be regarded as suspicious. Even looking at the footpath could be regarded as suspicious, since what can be demonstrated and plotted about on the photograph can also be plotted about and discussed by reference to descriptions of the place.
What is the more startling is the way that this proceeded to a search even once Mr Pelling had described what it was he was doing, who he was, and had produced a relevant pass. Even if we suppose for a moment that taking photographs of a footpath could be regarded as a suspicious activity, once there was an explanation and supporting detail what possible reason could there have been to consider that potential terrorist activity was taking place? I am not suggesting that the police should always accept explanations or even treat documents indicating identity as sacrosanct. Circumstances alter cases however. If someone was behaving suspiciously trying to enter the House of Commons and produced a pass, then one might reasonably consider that it needed to be checked because that is precisely the sort of document which might need to be produced in order to obtain entry. It is hardly however a likely pre-arranged cover for a trip to take photographs of the cycle path. This is the Croydon MP. Even if the activity could be described as suspicious or potentially suspicions anyway, it is difficult to see how it could be considered as suspicious once the explanation was given and the House of Commons pass emerged. Nonetheless a search of his bag was undertaken.
The problem is that once such powers are given they are used. Once the police start using them they are likely to use them not just to stop and question, but to search. Magnus Magnusson used to say when he was the quiz master on the general knowledge show Mastermind, if he was part way through a question when the buzzer rang to indicate that time was up, "I've started so I'll finish". This became his catchphrase. The same applies or seems to apply in respect of police stopping people regarding potential terrorism.
I am not suggesting that searches regarding potential terrorism are wholly unnecessary. I am concerned that use of these powers is far too widespread. Being searched without reason is no doubt unpleasant, and having your bags searched an intrusion on privacy. If you are doing nothing wrong, and there is no basis for supposing that you might be doing anything wrong, then absent compelling reasons you should be