Man loses legal bid to have Devon and Cornwall police reveal location of road cameras
DEVON and Cornwall Police have won a legal challenge to a decision ordering them to reveal the location of the counties' road cameras.
Campaigning journalist, Steven Mathieson, editor of Guardian Government Computing, demanded that the sites of automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras be released in 2009, under the Freedom of Information Act.
-
But the police's refusal to hand over the data sparked a long-running legal row over the implications of the cameras' positions being known to the public.
The issue is now set to be reviewed again later this year, after an appeal judge quashed an earlier decision that the information be revealed.
The upper tribunal heard police refused to say where the ANPR cameras were in August 2009, stating reasons of national security and the prevention of crime.
Their reply to Mr Mathieson read: "If the locations of these cameras were published, potential criminals would know where they are and could bypass or avoid them entirely.
"This would mean that the force would be less able to detect and reduce crime on the roads."
But the force's refusal to give up the locations was overruled by a first-tier tribunal last year, which ordered police to release the information within 35 days, pending an appeal.
The first-tier tribunal found: "There was, overall, a weak case made by [the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall] as to why it thought that disclosure of the information sought was likely to prejudice policing."
It added: "It does not seem to the tribunal that the argument and evidence before it were sufficient for it to find that the public interest in effective policing outweighed the public interest in disclosure of the requested information."
But the Chief Constable has now won an appeal against that decision, which Judge Charles Turnbull, sitting at the upper tribunal, ruled was "wrong in law". He ordered that the matter be considered afresh by a new first-tier tribunal.
"Factual issues as to... where the balance of the public interest lies are ones to which the composition of a first-tier tribunal is particularly suited", he said.
"It is in my judgement not necessary or appropriate for me to do anything more than to set the first-tier tribunal's decision aside and remit Mr Mathieson's appeal... to be redetermined by an entirely differently constituted first-tier tribunal."
29 Comments
View all
by noxbox
Friday, February 17 2012, 2:09PM
“I'm not a fan of speed cameras either mobile or fixed but I'm all for ANPR cameras as long as the police are following up and getting the culprits by intercepting them there and then. It's the only way to deal with these incidents, if they are happy to drive with no insurance etc then I doubt they would be too bothered about getting a penalty in the post, generally filed under bin being the main reaction.”
by DoWhatNow
Friday, February 17 2012, 12:53PM
“@ulysse1
"What really bugs me about these camera's is they are supposed to be there because the location is an accident black spot............the powers that place these camera's surely must have to provide evidence is it an accident black spot and not a money making spot."
I think you've missed the point (or not bothered to read the article)...
These cameras are NOT speed cameras, they are ANPR cameras. Nothing to do with an accident blackspot - in fact, there is no mention of accident blackspots anywhere in the article...
And yes, I can understand and appreciate the police's aregument as to why they don't want to provide the information.
TBH, FOI (Freedom of Information) requests are all well and good, but for some of them, you do find yourself wondering exactly WHY somone has asked for that information. Like in this instance - why do you want/need to know where the ANPR cameras are? Is it so that you can avoid them and if so, why do you need to avoid them - what are you trying to hide?”
by Anotherbloke
Friday, February 17 2012, 9:47AM
“China is quite a nice place to live these days, N Korea, no thanks, S Korea not bad.
Hell I bet most people on here are on Facebook, probably more information freely given up then any of these cameras would show.”
by PL1Plym
Friday, February 17 2012, 9:21AM
“@ jabbathebutt. The ironic thing is that all of this cctv that we are constantly being watched by doesn't actually work or the images are that bad that they aren't worth seeing anyway!”
by ulysse1
Thursday, February 16 2012, 10:05PM
“What really bugs me about these camera's is they are supposed to be there because the location is an accident black spot............the powers that place these camera's surely must have to provide evidence is it an accident black spot and not a money making spot.”
by josdave
Thursday, February 16 2012, 7:26PM
“If these cameras were to solve a crime involving Steven Mathieson I feel sure he would change his mind about giving the criminals extra freedom.”
by digger51
Thursday, February 16 2012, 4:58PM
“I don't mind living in a Police state if only they knew what they are doing.”
by jabbathebutt
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 8:12PM
“And another thing .... its ok conveniently using China and North Korea as an example of where to live if you dont like it here .... how about you use most of the rest of the civilised world where they are not the most CCTVd country ... but where the citizens are treated with a lot more respect ?. Your way is constant never ending more scrutiny... rather than stopping the disease. You jail someone for 5 years for no insurance ( and if you think thats a bit heavy - wait till you get hit by an uninsured driver !).... or hanging for murder or 20 years for any violence.... and birching for spoilt brats who say they have a drug problem there would be a quick decline in numbers of offenders. The rest of us inncocents could live freely without being spied upon all the time as in a police state.”
by jabbathebutt
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 7:58PM
“@PL1 Plym .... At least we know about where these are in shops and forecourts etc.... why on earth should the vast majority of innocent people in this country be spied upon by secret cameras ?
In your anoloagy of a free country we should have secret cameras aimed at our house - back and front ? .... just in case.You aint got nothing to hide so thats ok then ?
As far as I am concerned I dont like living in a virtual prison.
People like you wont be happy till we are all microchiped and every movement scanned.
Make the punishments for offenders more real and effective and we wouldnt all need to live like this . Its the easy option everytime for the law enforcement . We used to have a country where it was safer because the odd few that caught were punished harshly.... they didnt need to treat every single citizen as a potential criminal . Now we are all checked at every available opportunity - hundreds of times a day.”
by PL1Plym
Wednesday, February 15 2012, 1:32PM
“@ camdenbeau. If you live in a "Police State" then may I suggest you move. Try China or North Korea!
Get a grip people. Your number plate details are recorded every time you fill up with petrol, cross the Tamar Bridge pass a shop, pub or house with a CCTV camera. What's the difference? Who REALLY cares?”