S44 abuse of photographers raised in Parliament
| Site design and content is © original authors. To reproduce any content on this website, contact admin@photorights.org who will put you in touch with the copyright holder. You can read our privacy policy here. You are advised to seek professional legal advice in all matters pertaining to access rights for photography. Any advice given on this site is not intended to replace professional advice, and PhotoRights.org and its authors accept no liability for loss or damage arising from any errors or omissions. PhotoRights.org is not responsible for third party content, such as adverts, other websites linked to from this site, or comments added to articles by visitors. | ![]() |

David Heath (Somerton & Frome, Liberal Democrat):
"May we have a debate on what I can only term abuse of section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 by police? It is not satisfactory that people up and down the country are being stopped and told that they cannot take photographs - and if they have taken photographs, they are asked to delete them from their cameras-apparently on the whim of police officers. So far, people have been told that they cannot take a picture of Christ Church in the City, St. Paul's, railway wagons, Christmas lights-and of Mick's Plaice, a fish and chip shop in Chatham! Such photography is not prime terrorist activity. I honestly think that the police need some education about the very strong powers that we in this House give them, to make sure that they are not used improperly."
Harriet Harman responded by suggesting he bring up any "concerns about terrorism" during Home Office questions next week.
Source : They Work for You 10 Dec 2009.