Police defend sneaky protester snaps
Police claim photographs taken of protesters at Parliament during a visit by United States Secretary of State Rex Tillerson were destroyed within hours of being taken.
But protesters say the intimidating tactic was designed to link free speech with criminal behaviour. The police actions sparked concern about state surveillance undermining the lawful right to protest.
The Dominion Post asked police why they were photographing the peaceful protest organised to coincide with Tillerson’s visit to Wellington in June, days after US President Donald Trump pulled out of the Paris climate change agreement.
Heavily redacted correspondence from the aftermath of the protest - obtained under the Official Information Act - shows emails flew around police management confirming all photographs taken had not been retained.
The documents also reveal a police photographer was ordered to the protest because ‘‘lessons learned from the defence protest was that we needed to capture the actions of protesters to support prosecutions’’.
The lessons refer to police’s failed, drawn-out prosecution bid against protesters arrested during a 2015 weapons industry expo in Wellington.
Wellington Police district operations manager Inspector Brett Amas said photographing protests helped provide an accurate evidential record in case of any criminality.
It was an operational decision for each police district made on a case-by-case basis.
‘‘Just as media and individuals from protest groups can film and photograph during these public events, police may also capture images,’’ Amas said.
‘‘However, where there is no evidence of any criminal offending, the expectation is that all images would be deleted, which is what occurred in this case.’’
Niamh O’Flynn, executive director of 350 Aotearoa, said it was worrying that police were not a neutral presence at peaceful protests.
Photography and video footage being captured increased the sense of state surveillance around the right to protest, she said.
‘‘It seems a waste of taxpayer dollars to surveil people engaged in legal protest action. We will continue with our activities, and hope that the police will use their resources more appropriately.’’
Peace Action Wellington’s Laura Drew said while there was nothing new in surveillance and over-policing, police responses to political protest was ‘‘incredibly problematic’’.
‘‘The assumption that political protest is potentially illegal behaviour undermines our right to free speech,’’ she said.
‘‘It creates a false association between protest and criminality.’’