Caught on camera
Published: 20 October, 2010
What rights do shopping centres have to stop the public taking photographs in the malls?
There have been two recent incidents in UK shopping centres involving the banning of photography and many instances in which the enforcement of anti-terrorism laws have been described as human rights abuses. So, where do shopping centres stand with regard to photography restrictions?
One of the latest incidents took place at West Orchards shopping centre in Coventry in August when a Dutch tourist and photographer was asked by a security guard to delete a photograph he had taken in the centre.
Another incident happened just a few days later at Grand Arcade shopping centre in Cambridge when a Cypriot man was told he wasn’t allowed to use his mobile phone to take photographs in the centre causing an angry response from the public, with some even suggesting a boycott of the centre.
No-one from the Grand Arcade was available to comment but the Cambridge News reported that management said the photographic ban “ensured the interests of public safety” and pointed out that the shopping centre is private property and it had “a duty of care to its retailers which have individual policies relating to the use of their images, shop fronts and signage”.
Andy Talbot is centre manager at West Orchards. He said that the decision to adopt a policy restricting photography was made some years ago and although it was put in place partly for anti-terrorism reasons, it was also to “protect the privacy of visitors.”
Talbot had consulted the Counter Terrorism Protective Security Advice for Shopping Centres guide. In it there is a section on hostile reconnaissance which states that anybody considering terrorism is likely to use photography to plan an attack. He said: “We want to make planning an attack as difficult as possible and as part of this we decided to restrict photography.
“If someone is seen taking photographs of the structure or architecture of the building a mall operator will go and investigate and ask them to stop. We also ask them to delete the photos but we don’t force them - there is no law that allows us to do that. In the case of the Dutch tourist we asked him the delete the photos and he did so straight away. A polite “do you mind” usually works.”
“In terms of privacy we have a 700-seat food court which attracts groups of young kids,” he said. “Media coverage in recent years has made people more aware of paedophilia and parents have become more sensitive to people taking photos around their children. We have 7.5 million visitors through the centre and their safety and wellbeing is our main priority.”
Under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 police officers had powers to stop and search anyone they reasonably suspected of being a terrorist. Part of this meant that they could view images on a camera or mobile phone and could confiscate the memory card or film if they thought the photographs constituted evidence that the person was involved in terrorism. The police have never had the power to delete digital images or destroy film.
A spokesperson for the Home Office said: “Security guards are not warranted police officers so cannot and have never been able to use Section 44 to prevent people from taking pictures.
“For the police to be able to use Section 44 they must get permission from the Home Secretary. Private property owners would need to seek legal advice to check what laws they can enforce with regards to stopping people taking photographs. If someone is on public property and is taking a picture of a privately owned property there is no law to prevent this.”
After years of pressure from a host of human rights groups the Home Secretary Theresa May announced in July that Section 44 would be suspended and reviewed, as part of a pledge by the coalition government to review counter-terrorism powers.
The Home Secretary will report back on the findings in the autumn and any possible changes will be debated in Parliament.
