16 Feb 16
By Tamsin Allen, 16 February 2016
Tamsin Allen is head of Media and Information law at Bindmans LLP
Policing is a core function of the state, and it has long been accepted that our taxes pay for police services. The role of the police naturally shifts with changes in culture and the law, but the current position is that the police, as a public authority, have an obligation to ensure law and order and to preserve, and in some cases to promote, fundamental rights such as the right to protest and the right to freedom of expression, protected by Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, now incorporated into the UK’s domestic law as the Human Rights Act 1998.
There are some instances where the police are entitled to levy an additional charge for their services, but those must be services which are outside the core responsibilities of the police.
Section 25 of the Police Act 1996 deals with the “provision of special services” and states that:
The chief officer of police of a police force may provide, at the request of any person, special police services at any premises or in any locality in the police area for which the force is maintained, subject to the payment to the police authority of charges on such scales as may be determined by that authority.
The phrase special police services is not defined by the act. Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) guidance to senior police officers states:
“an event is an occurrence, out of the normal activity that takes place to provide an experience or defined activity to commercial or non-commercial reasons. Special police services are police services provided over and above core policing at the request of a person or organisation.”
Case law indicates that special police services include policing football matches (Chief Constable of Greater Manchester v Wigan Athletic AFC Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 1449) and music festivals (Reading Festival Ltd v West Yorkshire Police Authority [2006] EWCA Civ 524).
The reason why football matches and music festivals might need additional policing is because of the risk of public order offences being committed and because the organisers themselves require additional police to ensure that they can discharge their own duties to keep the attendees safe. Where the police have provided services over and above those that have been specifically requested, organisers have not been required to pay.
ACPO guidance draws a clear distinction between different categories of event:
• Commercial events intended to generate private profit;
• Non-commercial events i.e. charitable or community events; and
• Statutory events reflecting constitutional rights or processes.
It provides that: “Policing of statutory events is part of a core activity and no charges should be made” and defines statutory events as “events where there is no financial gain to the organiser and which reflect constitutional rights, or a cause of royal, national or defined public interest”.
As a public body, the police must act within their powers and discharge duties to which they are subject. They must take decisions rationally, fairly and in a way which takes account of relevant – but not irrelevant – considerations. Cultural organisations have a legitimate expectation that the police will follow published guidance unless there is a good reason to depart from it. However, this guidance should be clear, especially where it potentially interferes with fundamental rights. At present, this guidance lacks clarity and therefore policy practice in this area may lack consistency. This is an area which could potentially be subject to challenge by way of judicial review.
As it is presently constituted, the guidance suggests that the real dividing line is between commercial and non-commercial events. In situations where fundamental rights are engaged, such as the staging of a highly controversial art exhibition where protests are expected, it is certainly arguable that policing is a core function notwithstanding that it is a commercial event.
The police may have felt they could waive the fee they originally requested in relation to the 2004 production of Behud because the theatre was a not-for-profit organisation. However, there may be situations where a theatre or exhibition space is a commercial organisation, but the work of art in question raises issues of artistic and political freedom of expression. For instance, under the guidance, the police could have charged the Birmingham Repertory Theatre at what appears to be the going rate of £10,000 per day for policing Behtzi had it not been cancelled.
Using the distinction between commercial and non-commercial events as a lodestone for determining whether or not the police can charge for special services is thus not necessarily appropriate. Attendance at football matches or music festivals does not, on the face of it, involve the exercise of fundamental rights. The situation in respect of all theatre, art exhibitions or other forms of artistic expression, even where a profit is made, is quite different. The police have an obligation to fulfil their core duties – those are now enhanced by their duties under the Human Rights Act not to act incompatibly with the Convention. The Convention imposes a qualified obligation not to interfere with the exercise of the right to freedom of expression and protest and a positive obligation to take appropriate steps to protect those rights. The policing of artistic expression, where political sensitivity leads to the risk of public order issues, is part of the police’s core function and duties and should not be a matter of commercial negotiation. Protection for these rights should under no circumstances depend on whether or not an organisation can afford to pay for it.
02 Dec 15 | Magazine, mobile, Volume 44.04 Winter 2015
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”What can’t people talk about? The latest magazine looks at taboos around the world”][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]
What’s taboo today? It might depend where you live, your culture, your religion, or who you’re talking to. The latest issue of Index on Censorship magazine explores worldwide taboos in all their guises, and why they matter. Comedians Shazia Mirza and David Baddiel look at tackling tricky subjects for laughs; Alastair Campbell explains why we can’t be silent on mental health; and Saudi Arabia’s first female feature-film director Haifaa Al Mansour speaks out on breaking boundaries with conservative audiences.
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_empty_space height=”60px”][vc_single_image image=”71995″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]
Plus a crackdown on porn and showing your cleavage in China; growing up in Germany with the ghosts of WW2; what you can and can’t say in Israel and Palestine; and the argument for not editing racism out of old films. As the anniversary of Charlie Hebdo murders approaches, we also have a special section of cartoonists from around the world who have drawn taboos from their homelands – from nudity, atheism and death to domestic violence and necrophilia.
Also in this issue, Mark Frary explores the secret algorithms controlling the news we see, Natasha Joseph interviews the Swaziland editor who took on the king and ended up in prison, and Duncan Tucker speaks to radio journalists who lost their jobs after investigating presidential property deals in Mexico.
And in our culture section, Chilean author Ariel Dorfman looks at the power of music as resistance in an exclusive short story, which is finally seeing the light after 50 years in the pipeline. We have fiction from young writers in Burma tackling changing rules in times of transition, and there’s newly translated poetry written from behind bars in Egypt, amid the continuing crackdown on peaceful protest.
Each magazine sale helps Index on Censorship fight for free expression worldwide. Order your copy here, or take out a digital subscription via Exact Editions (just £18 for the year).
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”SPECIAL REPORT: WHAT’S THE TABOO? ” css=”.vc_custom_1483453507335{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]
Why breaking down social barriers matters
Stand up to taboos – Shazia Mirza and David Baddiel on how comedy tackles the no-go subjects
The reel world – Nikki Baughan interviews female film directors Susanne Bier and Haifaa Al Mansour, from Denmark and Saudi Arabia
Not just hot air – Kaya Genç goes inside Turkey’s right-wing satire magazine Püff
Slam session – Péter Molnár speaks to fellow Hungarian slam poets about what they can and can’t say
Whereof we cannot speak – Regula Venske on growing up in Germany after WWII
China’s XXX factor – Jemimah Steinfeld investigates a crackdown on porn and cleavage
Pregnant, in danger and scared to speak – Nina Lakhani and Goretti Horgan on abortion laws and social stigma in El Salvador and Ireland
Airbrushing racism – Kunle Olulode explores the problems of erasing racist words from books and films
Why are we whispering? – Alastair Campbell on why discussing mental illness still makes some people uncomfortable
Shouting about sex (workers) – Ian Dunt looks at the debate where everyone wants to silence each other
The history man – Professor Mohammed Dajani Daoudi explains how he has no regrets, despite causing outrage after taking Palestinian students to Auschwitz
Provoking Putin – Oleg Kashin on how new laws are silencing Russians
Quiet zone: a global cartoon special – Featuring taboo-busting illustrations from Bonil, Dave Brown, Osama Eid Hajjaj, Fiestoforo, Ben Jennings, Khalil Rhaman, Martin Rowson, Brian John Spencer, Padrag Srbljanin, Toad and Vilma Vargas
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”IN FOCUS” css=”.vc_custom_1481731813613{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]
Reining in power – Natasha Joseph talks to the Swaziland editor who took on the king
Whose world are you watching? – Mark Frary explores the secret algorithms controlling the news we see
Bloggers behind bars – Ismail Einashe interviews Ethiopia’s Zone 9 bloggers
Mexican airwaves – Duncan Tucker speaks to radio journalists who were shut down after investigating presidential property deals
Head to head – Bassey Etim and Tom Slater debate whether website moderators are the new censors
Off the map – Irene Caselli on how some of the poorest people in Buenos Aires fought back against Argentina’s mainstream media
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”CULTURE” css=”.vc_custom_1481731777861{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]
The rocky road to transition – Ellen Wiles introduces new fiction by young Burmese writers Myay Hmone Lwin and Pandora
Sounds of solidarity – Chilean author Ariel Dorfman presents his short story on the power of music as resistance
Poetry from a prisoner – Omar Hazek shares his verses written in an Egyptian jail and translated by Elisabeth Jaquette
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”COLUMNS” css=”.vc_custom_1481732124093{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]
Global view – Index on Censorship’s CEO, Jodie Ginsberg, on the pull between extremism legislation, free speech and terrorism
Index around the world – Josie Timms presents Index’s latest work and events
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”END NOTE” css=”.vc_custom_1481880278935{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-top: 15px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]
[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_custom_heading text=”SUBSCRIBE” css=”.vc_custom_1481736449684{margin-right: 0px !important;margin-left: 0px !important;border-bottom-width: 1px !important;padding-bottom: 15px !important;border-bottom-color: #455560 !important;border-bottom-style: solid !important;}”][vc_column_text]Index on Censorship magazine was started in 1972 and remains the only global magazine dedicated to free expression. Past contributors include Samuel Beckett, Gabriel García Marquéz, Nadine Gordimer, Arthur Miller, Salman Rushdie, Margaret Atwood, and many more.[/vc_column_text][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_single_image image=”76572″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/2″][vc_column_text]In print or online. Order a print edition here or take out a digital subscription via Exact Editions.
Copies are also available at the BFI, the Serpentine Gallery, MagCulture, (London), News from Nowhere (Liverpool), Home (Manchester), Calton Books (Glasgow) and on Amazon. Each magazine sale helps Index on Censorship continue its fight for free expression worldwide.
SUBSCRIBE NOW[/vc_column_text][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]
21 Oct 15 | About Index, Campaigns, mobile, Statements, Turkey, Turkey Statements
Following the conclusion of an Oct. 19 to 21, 2015 joint international emergency press freedom mission to Turkey, representatives of participating international, regional and local groups dedicated to press freedom and free expression find that pressure on journalists operating in Turkey has severely escalated in the period between parliamentary elections held June 7 and the upcoming elections.
The representatives also determine that this pressure has significantly impacted journalists’ ability to report on matters of public interest freely and independently, and that this pressure, if allowed to continue, is likely to have a significant, negative impact on the ability of voters in Turkey to share and receive necessary information, with a corresponding effect on Turkey’s democracy.
Accordingly, the representatives stand in solidarity with their colleagues in the media in Turkey and demand an immediate end to all pressure that hinders or prevents them from performing their job, or which serves to foster an ongoing climate of self-censorship. They also urge that steps be taken to ensure that all journalists are able to freely investigate stories involving matters of public interest, including allegations of corruption, the “Kurdish issue”, alleged human rights violations, armed conflict – particularly issues related to the ongoing conflict in Syria – and local or regional issues or policies.
Further, the representatives specifically urge authorities in Turkey:
- To conduct a complete and transparent investigation into violent attacks on journalists and media outlets, including recent incidents targeting Hurriyet and columnist Ahmet Hakan, and to ensure that impunity for violent attacks on journalists is not allowed to flourish.
- To end the abuse of anti-terror laws to chill reporting on matters of public interest or criticism of public figures, and to ensure that such laws are both precisely tailored to serve only legitimate ends and interpreted narrowly
- To reform laws providing criminal penalties for insult and defamation by dealing with such cases under civil law and to end all use of such laws to target journalists, particularly Art. 299, which provides Turkey’s president with heightened protection from criticism, in violation of international standards.
- To enact reforms to free state media outlets from political pressure, e.g., by effecting a transition to a public broadcasting service that presents information from plural and diverse sources.
- To end the use of state agencies, such as tax authorities or others, to apply pressure against journalists who engage in criticism or critical coverage of politicians or government actions.
- To end the practice of seeking bans on the dissemination of content related to matters of public interest, e.g., the ban on dissemination of information related to the recent bombings in Ankara, and the practice of seeking to prohibit satellite or online platforms from carrying the signals of certain broadcasters.
- To refrain from taking other steps to censor online content, such as the blocking of websites or URLs, or the blocking of social media accounts, absent a legitimate, compelling reason for doing so, subject to independent judicial oversight.
- To release all journalists imprisoned on connection with journalistic activity, and to immediately and unconditionally release VICE News fixer Mohammed Rasool, who remains behind bars despite the release of two British colleagues for whom he was working and with whom he was detained.
- To end all arbitrary detentions and/or deportations of foreign journalists.
- To respect the right of journalists to freely associate and to end pressure brought in recent years against the Journalists Union of Turkey.
The mission representatives also urge Turkey’s president:
- To end all exercises of direct personal pressure on owners and/or chief editors of critical media.
- To stop using negative or hostile rhetoric targeting journalists.
- To accept the greater degree of criticism that comes with holding public office, to stop using criminal insult or defamation provisions to silence critics, and to publicly call on supporters to refrain from seeking to initiate such cases on his behalf.
Moreover, the mission representatives urge foreign governments, particularly those of the United States and countries within the European Union:
- To press Turkey to uphold its commitments to respect and uphold international human rights standards and, in the case of the EU, to ensure that any concessions granted in connection with resolution of the ongoing refugee crisis are made consistent with a long-term strategy specifically designed to encourage Turkey to comply with its commitments to uphold international human rights standards.
Finally, the mission representatives urge journalists in Turkey:
- To avoid the use of negative or hostile rhetoric targeting other journalists and to strive to uphold ethical standards developed by or as the result of self-regulatory bodies or processes.
- To exercise greater solidarity with colleagues under pressure and to defend the rights of all journalists.
Markus Spillmann, IPI Executive Board Vice Chair
Barbara Trionfi, IPI Executive Director
Steven M. Ellis, IPI Director of Advocacy and Communications
Muzaffar Suleymanov, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) Europe and Central Asia Program Research Associate
Erol Onderoglu, Reporters Without Borders (RSF) Representative
Patrick Kamenka, Journalist, Intl. Federation of Journalists/European Federation of Journalists (IFJ/EFJ)
Mustafa Kuleli, Turkish Journalists Union (TGS) Secretary General; Member IFJ/EFJ
David Diaz-Jogeix, Article 19 Director of Programmes
Melody Patry, Index on Censorship Senior Advocacy Officer
Ceren Sozeri, Ethical Journalism Network (EJN) Member; Galatasaray University Associate Professor
2015 JOINT INTERNATIONAL EMERGENCY PRESS FREEDOM MISSION TO TURKEY – FACT SHEET
From Oct. 19 to 21, 2015, representatives of the International Press Institute (IPI), the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), Reporters Without Borders (RSF), the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ), Index on Censorship, Article 19 and the Ethical Journalism Network (EJN) conducted a joint international emergency press freedom mission to Turkey.
The mission was conducted with the support and assistance of the Journalists’ Union of Turkey (TGS) and IPI’s National Committee in Turkey, with representatives of both groups also joining the mission.
The mission was conducted in light of deep concerns over the deteriorating state of press freedom in Turkey and its impact both on the upcoming Nov. 1 parliamentary elections and beyond. Its primary goals were to demonstrate solidarity with colleagues in the media in Turkey, to focus attention in Turkey and abroad on the impact that growing pressure on independent media is likely to have on the ability to hold a free and fair election, and to push for an end to such pressure.
Specific concerns related to, among other developments, physical attacks on journalists and media outlets; raids on media outlets and seizures of publications; threatening rhetoric directed at journalists; the increasing use of criminal insult and anti-terrorism laws targeting independent media and government critics; the ongoing imprisonment of journalists; deportations of foreign journalists; and decisions by satellite and online television providers to stop carrying signals of broadcasters critical of the government.
During the course of meetings in Istanbul and Ankara, mission participants heard from representatives from nearly 20 different major media outlets in Turkey. They also met with representatives of three of the four parties currently holding seats in Turkey’s Grand National Assembly: the Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP).
Organisers sought to meet with representatives of the Justice and Development Party (AKP), but were not afforded an opportunity to do so. Similarly, organisers sought meetings with President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s spokesperson and foreign policy adviser, but received no response.
At the close of the mission, participants conducted a dialogue forum bringing together representatives from a broad cross section of media in Turkey for an open discussion to share with them the participants’ experience in Ankara meeting with foreign diplomats and representatives of political parties, and to hear the media representatives’ concerns and suggestions for how international organisations can best support press freedom and free expression in Turkey.
About the Participants
The International Press Institute (IPI) is a global network of editors, media executives and leading journalists dedicated to furthering and safeguarding press freedom, promoting the free flow of news and information, and improving the practices of journalism.
The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) is an independent, non-profit organisation that works to safeguard press freedom worldwide.
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) is a non-profit organisation which defends the freedom to be informed and to inform others throughout the world.
The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) is a global union federation of journalists’ trade unions that aims to protect and strengthen the rights and freedoms of journalists.
The European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) is a branch of the International Federation of Journalists.
Article 19 is human rights organisation that fights for the protection of freedom of expression and access to information, particularly protecting those that dissent.
Index on Censorship is an international human rights organisation that promotes and defends the fundamental right to freedom of expression and campaigns against censorship.
The Ethical Journalism Network (EJN) promotes ethics, good governance and independent regulation of media content.
The Journalists Union of Turkey (TGS) is the affiliate in Turkey of the International Federation of Journalists and the European Federation of Journalists.
