Participate Translate Blank profile picture
Image for Boris Johnson's Water Cannon and UK's shrivelling civil liberties

Boris Johnson's Water Cannon and UK's shrivelling civil liberties

Published on

Story by

Joel Lewin


Lon­don Mayor Boris John­son re­cently re­quested a water can­non. He wants to boost po­lice fire-power and blast pro­tes­ts off the streets as and when they arise. Lon­don­ers were hor­ri­fied. But more sur­pris­ing than the re­quest itself was Teresa May’s re­fusal to grant it

This small vic­tory for civil lib­er­ties- a water can­non re­fused- runs counter to the creep­ing re­trench­ment of free speech and re­trac­tion of press free­dom which have de­fined this gov­ern­ment. Brits may not feel dis­tinctly less free yet, but this is the most sin­is­ter part; the re­forms are sub­tle and in­sid­i­ous, slowly but surely clos­ing vice-like on civil so­ci­ety.

Human Rights... Get OUT!

The thought of Boris with a water canon seems more per­verse and un­pleas­ant in light of the To­ries’ re­cent pledge to cut ties with the Eu­ro­pean Court of Human Rights. The gov­ern­ment feels human rights are op­pres­sive and the court’s rul­ings are hold­ing them back from re­ally giv­ing the people what for. The Con­ser­v­a­tive Party was par­tic­u­larly dis­tressed by a re­cent rul­ing that gives pris­on­ers with life sen­tences the right to re­view. ‘Life means life!’ shouts Cameron lustily, pan­der­ing to the an­te­dilu­vian droves on the back­benches.

The cur­rent gov­ern­ment has de­vel­oped a tal­ent for dis­tort­ing de­bate. They mis­rep­re­sent the work of the Stras­bourg court, fu­elling hys­te­ria by draw­ing dis­pro­por­tion­ate at­ten­tion to the rare rul­ings that the pub­lic dis­agree with, such as the Abu Hamza de­por­ta­tion de­lays. They pre­fer to for­get that we have the ECHR to thank for nor­mal­is­ing the age of con­sent for ho­mo­sex­u­als and het­ero­sex­u­als, for guar­an­tee­ing greater care to vul­ner­a­ble pris­on­ers and for pro­tect­ing the anonymity of jour­nal­ists’ sources. Yet Jus­tice Sec­re­tary Chris Grayling, how­ever, claims the ECHR, ‘does not make this coun­try a bet­ter place’.

Water canons at home and wa­ter­board­ing abroad, the UK has been mak­ing waves on the in­ter­na­tional stage as well. A High Court in­quiry re­cently re­vealed that the UK was com­plicit in the tor­ture of forty ter­ror sus­pects.

Jour­nal­ists are now ter­ror­ists

The cur­rent gov­ern­ment has at­tacked and di­luted the in­de­pen­dence of the press more than any gov­ern­ment for three cen­turies. Their ap­proach to the Snow­den af­fair- to rev­e­la­tions that GCHQ records data from mil­lions of phone calls- has been heavy-handed and dis­turb­ing. Rather than seek­ing to atone, they have at­tacked. Politi­cians hauled Guardian Ed­i­tor Alan Rus­bridger into par­lia­ment for in­ter­ro­ga­tion, an un­prece­dented step.

They de­stroyed Guardian hard dri­ves con­tain­ing the Snow­den files with a cir­cu­lar saw. The gov­ern­ment knew the files were backed up else­where; the ac­tion was merely cyn­i­cal and sym­bolic, a state­ment of in­tent from a gov­ern­ment seek­ing to pal­li­ate their panic with pos­tur­ing. More audacious still, the po­lice ar­rested Glenn Green­wald’s part­ner, David Mi­randa, for nine hours with­out charge under anti-ter­ror­ism laws. This con­fla­tion of jour­nal­ism with ter­ror­ism, a first for the UK, is more typ­i­cal of dic­ta­tor­ships. It sets an alarm­ing prece­dent.

The gov­ern­ment has ma­nip­u­lated the phone hack­ing scan­dal to serve as an ex­cuse to gain con­trol over the media. In Oc­to­ber 2013 the gov­ern­ment forced through a Royal Char­ter on Press Reg­u­la­tion. A re­sponse to the phone hack­ing scan­dal and the sub­se­quent Leve­son In­quiry, this Char­ter was drawn up by politi­cians be­hind closed doors, with no input or con­sul­ta­tion with the media. The speed and se­crecy of the af­fair was un­nerv­ing. A des­per­ate last minute in­junc­tion brought by pub­lish­ers was crushed by the Court of Ap­peal. Ac­cord­ing to Richard Gor­don QC, from the Press Stan­dards Board of Fi­nance, ‘what is en­vis­aged in the Gov­ern­ment char­ter is the pos­si­bil­ity of ex­ec­u­tive con­trol of the Press for the first time since 1695.’ With a flour­ish of the pen, cen­turies of press in­de­pen­dence, en­vied the world over, was ended in an in­stant.

Now ad­mi­ra­tion has given way to op­pro­brium. The World As­so­ci­a­tion of News­pa­pers and Pub­lish­ers (WAN-IFRA) is send­ing an un­prece­dented press free­dom mis­sion to the UK to raise con­cerns. Pre­vi­ous del­e­ga­tions have gone to Ethiopia, Libya, Yemen, Tunisia, Mex­ico, Hon­duras, Ecuador, Colom­bia, Guatemala and Azer­bai­jan. The UK is in good com­pany.

The Porn Fil­ter

Fi­nally we come to the much-ma­ligned ‘porn fil­ter’. The White­hall ini­tia­tive is more than sim­ply prud­ish, it is down­right ne­far­i­ous. In­ter­net users have to ex­plic­itly ‘opt in’ to ac­cess ma­te­r­ial that is porno­graphic or ‘ob­scene or taste­less’. Who are politi­cians to tell us what is ‘ob­scene or taste­less’?

The ‘porn’ fil­ter has al­ready been used to block ac­cess to sites of­fer­ing help to self-harm­ers, al­co­holics, drug abusers, vic­tims of do­mes­tic abuse, and mem­bers of the LGBT com­mu­nity. Pre­vent­ing vul­ner­a­ble chil­dren from ac­cess­ing these sites is tragic, even more so when it is done in the name of pro­tect­ing them. In­ci­den­tally, child-pro­tec­tion is the premise used by the Russ­ian gov­ern­ment to pass leg­is­la­tion vic­tim­is­ing the LGBT com­mu­nity.

Richard Gor­don QC de­scribed the afore­men­tioned Royal Char­ter as ‘Kafka-es­que’. Or­well’s ‘1984’ is often evoked in ref­er­ence to the Snow­den rev­e­la­tions. But these lit­er­ary par­a­digms don’t do jus­tice to the un­par­al­leled depth and breadth of David Cameron’s dystopian vi­sion. GCHQ snoop­ing, The Royal Char­ter, anti-ter­ror leg­is­la­tion, the porn fil­ter; we are read­ing about these things in the press but we are yet to per­son­ally feel the full force of their im­pact. This is what is most alarm­ing. They are sub­tle, in­sid­i­ous ini­tia­tives, and, as a re­ac­tionary so­ci­ety that tends to tol­er­ate in­con­ve­nience with a stiff upper lip, it seems Britain will allow these creep­ing ad­vances to con­tinue until it is too late. The tools are being put in place for hith­erto un­seen lev­els of civil and so­cial con­trol. Boris’ wet dream is just a drop in the ocean.

Story by