22 May 19 | News and features, Press Releases
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106984″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][vc_single_image image=”106985″ img_size=”full”][/vc_column_inner][vc_column_inner width=”1/4″][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][vc_column_text]A raid on the homes and office of two Northern Irish investigative journalists should be ruled unlawful, freedom of expression groups Index on Censorship and English PEN have said in a submission to the High Court in Northern Ireland.
Index and English PEN have intervened in the case of Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey, who were arrested and questioned last year following armed raids on their homes over allegations a confidential document featured in their documentary No Stone Unturned, which examines claims of state collusion in the murders of six men had been stolen.
During the raid, police seized documents, personal computers and USB sticks belonging to family members and copied a computer server that contained years of sensitive reporting by the documentary makers, risking endangering confidential sources unrelated to the film.
Birney, McCaffrey and Fine Point Films will argue in a judicial review case to be heard in Belfast next week that the court should recognise that the search warrants used to carry out the raids were unlawful and improperly executed.
Index on Censorship and English PEN filed a written submission to the court on May 17 after the court granted permission for the organisations to intervene.
“The application for and execution of the search warrants was wholly disproportionate,” the submission states, noting the “chilling effect” of such orders. “That chilling effect is considerably more acute when the application is made ex parte [with respect to or in the interests of one side only or of an interested outside party], when authorities on the rights of journalists are not brought to the Court’s attention, and when the manner of the execution of the search warrants is so severe… such conduct is likely to have the effect of intimidating journalists throughout Northern Ireland and further afield.”
Index on Censorship and English PEN are represented by solicitor Darragh Mackin at Phoenix Law and barrister Jude Bunting at Doughty Street Chambers.
For more information please contact Sean Gallagher at Index on Censorship – [email protected] – or Cat Lucas at English PEN – [email protected].
Notes for editors
The judicial review will be held from 28 – 30 May.
English PEN is a registered charity and membership organisation which campaigns in the United Kingdom and around the world to protect the freedom to share information and ideas through writing.PEN supports authors and journalists in the United Kingdom and internationally who are prosecuted, persecuted, detained, or imprisoned for exercising the right to freedom of expression. English PEN has a strong record of campaigning for legal reform throughout the United Kingdom.
Index on Censorship is a London-based non-profit organisation that publishes work by censored writers and artists and campaigns against censorship worldwide. Since its founding in 1972, Index on Censorship has published some of the greatest names in literature in its award-winning quarterly magazine, including Samuel Beckett, Nadine Gordimer, Mario Vargas Llosa, Arthur Miller and Kurt Vonnegut. It also has published some of the world’s best campaigning writers from Vaclav Havel to Elif Shafak.[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1558600708500-33cfa04e-8965-8″ taxonomies=”8996″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
23 Apr 19 | Campaigns -- Featured, Europe and Central Asia, Media Freedom, media freedom featured, Northern Ireland, Statements, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Index on Censorship has filed an alert with the Council of Europe’s platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists regarding the murder of leading young journalist Lyra McKee in Northern Ireland.
Index condemns the killing in the strongest possible terms and calls on the UK authorities to bring those responsible to justice and on European governments to do more to ensure the safety of journalists.
McKee’s murder follows the murders of three journalists in Council of Europe countries in 2018 — Jan Kuciak, Jamal Khashoggi and Viktoria Marinova. The assassination of investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia in Malta in 2017 remains unsolved, with calls for a public inquiry still unmet.
Jodie Ginsberg, Index on Censorship CEO, said: “Lyra McKee’s murder is devastating news. The loss of such promise is heartbreaking. Index will continue to monitor the safety of journalists in the UK and other countries and to campaign for much stronger action to keep journalists safe when they do their work”.
The Council of Europe’s platform to promote the protection of journalism and safety of journalists aims to improve the protection of journalists, better address threats and violence against media professionals and foster early warning mechanisms and response capacity within the Council of Europe. Index on Censorship is a platform partner.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
07 Nov 18 | Campaigns -- Featured, Counter Terrorism, Statements, United Kingdom
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill is currently being debated in the House of Lords. Index is very concerned about the bill’s impacts on freedom of expression.
Index is disappointed by the lacklustre engagement by most peers in the debate and the unwillingness of the House of Lords to challenge the bill.
While there has been little progress in the House of Lords when it comes to protecting freedom of expression in the bill, a proposed new amendment by Lord Anderson deserves support. The former Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, together with Baroness Manningham-Buller and Lords Judge and Paddick, is proposing an annual review of the list of proscribed (terrorist) organisations.
There are currently 88 proscribed organisations, including 14 in Northern Ireland. Most have been proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000. Proscribing an organisation has severe consequences, including ones related to freedom of expression.
It is a crime to belong to – or claim that you belong to – a proscribed organisation, to invite support for a proscribed organisation or to wear clothes or carry or display articles in public in such a way or in such circumstances as to arouse reasonable suspicion that you are a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation.
The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill aims to create new offences related to proscribed organisations with further restrictions on freedom of expression. For example, it would become an offence to make a statement that is “supportive” of a proscribed organisation if you do so in a way that is reckless as to whether another person is encouraged to support a proscribed organisation (Index opposes this clause).
However, the Home Office has told Lord Anderson that at least 14 proscribed organisations do not meet the conditions for proscription, because they are not “concerned in terrorism”.
An organisation that wishes to be deproscribed must apply to the Home Secretary. It is the only way for an organisation to be removed from the list. Three organisations have been deproscribed: the Peoples’ Mujaheddin of Iran in 2008, the International Sikh Youth Federation in 2016 and Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin in 2017. The high legal costs involved, especially if it involves appealing a decision to refuse deproscription, are likely to be a significant deterrent.
During debate on the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill Lord Anderson offered the case of the Irish women’s organisation Cumann na mBan as an example, pointing out that it was once aligned with the Irish Republican Army and remains proscribed despite no evidence that the organisation has been concerned in terrorism during this century at least.
Because of the far-reaching implications of proscription, including the restrictions related to freedom of expression, organisations that do not meet the conditions for proscription should not remain on the list.
The amendment proposed by Lord Anderson (amendment 59) would require the Secretary of State to review each proscribed organisation at least once every year, including determining if the organisation satisfies the conditions for proscription, publish each decision and report to Parliament.
Index urges members of the House of Lords to support this amendment.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1541582801710-de97750c-50b3-5″ taxonomies=”27743″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
09 Oct 18 | Counter Terrorism, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Belfast-based Irish News security correspondent Allison Morris told Index on Censorship her concerns about the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill in its current form.
The bill would have significant implications for journalism and media freedom. Lack of clarity and definition in many of its clauses would add to the difficulties that the bill would create for journalists. Journalists in Northern Ireland would face particularly acute problems.
“The bill proposes making it an offence to express and opinion or belief that is in support of a proscribed organisation,” Morris said. There are currently 14 proscribed organisations in Northern Ireland.
Morris has reported on dozens of statements from paramilitary groups for acts they have committed — from bombings and shootings to murder. “While I’m always aware that these claims can be used for propaganda purposes the public interest in knowing who was responsible for such acts of terror I believe outweighs that.”
She says knowing who is responsible is crucial to getting authorities to carry out an “adequate” investigation. The Counter-Terrorism bill’s opaque terminology means that “without clarity any journalist carrying a statement from a proscribed group could technically be breaking the law,” Morris said.
Morris says this has possible implications for reporting and documenting the history of Northern Ireland’s conflict, and wonders would it mean never to speak to or interview an ex-prisoner or former participant in the conflict.
“The bill also proposes making it illegal to publish an image which would arouse reasonable suspicion that the offender was a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation – in local terms this means covering parades, funerals or statements of intent could lead to the arrest of journalists and photographers,” she said.
Morris said that at a time when investigative journalism is under attack globally “such Draconian laws could impact the ability of security journalists to properly – and without fear of arrest – pursue stories connected to terror groups.”
“That seems a very dangerous tactic and one that should be resisted by anyone in favour of a free and independent press.”
Index is calling on the House of Lords to stop the bill being enacted in its current form.[/vc_column_text][vc_basic_grid post_type=”post” max_items=”8″ style=”load-more” items_per_page=”4″ element_width=”6″ grid_id=”vc_gid:1539017012819-9c1318f9-7fa2-6″ taxonomies=”27743, 26927″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
