Partner of journalist behind NSA expose held for nine hours at Heathrow

Partner of the Guardian journalist whose reportage recently exposed the US’ National Security Agency’s (NSA) mass-surveillance programs, yesterday joined the 0.05 per cent detenu minority to be held up at an airport for over six hours under the Terrorism Act 2000 by the UK police, reported the Guardian.

David Miranda, the Brazilian partner of British journalist Glenn Greenwald, was detained at the Heathrow International Airport for nine hours by the UK police under Schedule 7 of the Act as he was returning from a trip to Berlin. At Berlin he was visiting US filmmaker Laura Poitras who has also been working with Greenwald on the NSA expose.

As per official figures, over 97 per cent of the examinations under Schedule 7 last less than an hour. Miranda was released, but officials confiscated electronics equipment including his mobile phone, laptop, camera, memory sticks, DVDs and games consoles.

Schedule 7 empowers the police to stop and search individuals without prior authorisation or reasonable suspicion, and those stopped do not have the right to silence – setting it apart from other police powers.

Greenwald said: “But the last thing it will do is intimidate or deter us in any way from doing our job as journalists. Quite the contrary: it will only embolden us more to continue to report aggressively.” [Greenwald’s editorial]

Comments

Scooter 19 Aug 2013, 08:53
+0 -0
He has the right to remain silent!
Dosto 19 Aug 2013, 11:16
+0 -0
LI, please use some other politically correct term for referring to homosexual significant others, existing usage often attempts to confuse us... :P
@ Prachi / Kian 20 Aug 2013, 05:48
+0 -0
I am very confused with "Schedule 7 empowers the police to stop and search individuals without prior authorisation or reasonable suspicion, and those stopped do not have the right to silence ...".

How exactly will the law enforcement agencies make a suspect sing? Are you saying that torture can be used, or is there a penalty for not responding to questions? Would appreciate a clarification. Thanks.
Prachishrivastava 20 Aug 2013, 05:52
+0 -0
Yes actually it is a criminal offence to refuse to answer the police's questions when held under Schedule 7.

The relevant sections by the way:

A person who is questioned under paragraph 2 or 3 must—

(a)give the examining officer any information in his possession which the officer requests;

(b)give the examining officer on request either a valid passport which includes a photograph or another document which establishes his identity;

(c)declare whether he has with him documents of a kind specified by the examining officer;

(d)give the examining officer on request any document which he has with him and which is of a kind specified by the officer.



18(1)A person commits an offence if he—

(a)wilfully fails to comply with a duty imposed under or by virtue of this Schedule,

(b)wilfully contravenes a prohibition imposed under or by virtue of this Schedule, or

(c)wilfully obstructs, or seeks to frustrate, a search or examination under or by virtue of this Schedule.

(2)A person guilty of an offence under this paragraph shall be liable on summary conviction to—

(a)imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months,

(b)a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale, or

(c)both.

Best wishes,
Prachi
@ Prachi 20 Aug 2013, 08:32
+0 -0
Thank you!
Scooter 21 Aug 2013, 04:33
+0 -0
the detention time mentioned in the first and second para is diff. as you have mentioned you may have taken this from the guardian (the first para), however, the next para either needs a source or seems to be an error.
Prachishrivastava 21 Aug 2013, 04:39
+0 -0
Hi Scooter,

Thank you for your comment.

The first para is about him being one in 2000 people to be held for more than six hours. Nine hours - mentioned in the second para - was the exact duration of his detention. Both details are from the Guardian report.

Best wishes,
Prachi
Scooter 21 Aug 2013, 05:26
+0 -0
My bad. Thanks for correcting.