Police launch UK-wide operation to protect election candidates
|
Version 0 of 1. Officers intend to tackle attacks and abuse but say robust free speech is not a crime Police are launching their biggest ever operation to keep election candidates safe from attacks and abuse amid rising concern from politicians about the dangers they face. But officers are telling candidates that comments that are rude, distasteful or shocking are likely to be considered as freedom of expression and not a potential crime. Candidates have been urged not to go knocking on doors while canvassing alone and not to dismiss abuse or threats without reporting them to police. Since the murder of Jo Cox in 2016 there has been heightened anxiety about the threats MPs and politicians receive, and tensions have been inflamed by Brexit. Reports of threats and harassment from around the country will be analysed by a national police unit to identify any emerging trends, such as threats being organised or directed against a specific type of candidate. Assessment will be carried out daily and 43 forces will brief every candidate on danger signs and how to keep safe. The Guardian understands that counter-terrorism investigators are stepping up work to spot threats from Islamist or far-right extremists. Female politicians and those of Jewish and minority ethnic backgrounds have faced abuse, with social media making it easier for perpetrators to stay anonymous. Law enforcement infrastructure used in times of crisis will be deployed. The National Police Coordination Centre will sift through reports for trends. Martin Hewitt, the chair of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, will lead that part of the operation. Part of the challenge is working out what is robust free speech in an election campaign and what may constitute criminal offences. Hewitt said: “Strong and varied views are the mark of a healthy democracy, but these should not cross the line into criminal abuse, harassment or disorder. There are serious penalties for those who are found guilty of criminal offences. “We’re not going to tell anyone to limit their campaigning or enthusiasm in any way, but we are taking precautionary steps ourselves and providing sensible advice to candidates. “The guidance gives candidates information about potential offences such as criminal damage, abusive or threatening behaviour, harassment, stalking, hate crimes and election-related crimes such as false statements against a candidate’s character.” The parliamentary liaison and investigation team (PLaIT), set up after a rightwing terrorist murdered Jo Cox, will advise local forces and election officials. The written safety advice tells candidates to “minimise availability of personal information”. Warning signs include “communications, on or offline, which contain abusive or threatening language. Repeated unwanted contact may constitute harassment or stalking. Racial, homophobic or other discriminatory abuse or threats. Fixation on you or an issue associated with your campaign.” A section on communication offences shows the difficulties of determining what is and is not robust free speech. It says “menacing” or “grossly offensive” communication could be an offence. It adds: “Communication which is merely any one of the following is likely to be protected as freedom of expression: (a) Offensive, shocking or disturbing; or (b) Satirical, iconoclastic or rude comment; or (c) The expression of unpopular or unfashionable opinion about serious or trivial matters, or banter or humour, even if distasteful to some or painful to those subjected to it; or (d) An uninhibited and ill thought-out contribution to a casual conversation where participants expect a certain amount of repartee or ‘give and take’.” The guidance says harassment and intimidation can psychologically damage candidates. “There have been occasions where candidates have been exposed to unacceptable levels of harassment and intimidation. This can have a significant psychological impact on candidates and those close to them, and can affect their wellbeing. In some cases, these behaviours and actions have reached the criminal threshold. The worst examples have led to violence and injury.” |