|
Terror chief warns of media
leaks
BBC
Tuesday April 23, 2007
The UK's counter-terrorism chief has condemned as "beneath
contempt" people who leak anti-terrorism intelligence.
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke of the Metropolitan Police
said there were a "small number of misguided individuals who
betray confidences".
By doing so, they had compromised investigations, revealed sources
of life-saving intelligence and "put lives at risk" during
major investigations.
DAC Clarke also warned of a damaging "lack of public trust"
in intelligence.
In a major speech at the Policy Exchange, a think-tank, DAC Clarke
said his role as National Co-ordinator of Terrorist Investigations
was to bridge the intelligence and policing worlds in an environment
that had completely changed in recent years.
Some 100 suspects were awaiting terrorism trials, he said.
But he warned the police's efforts to counter terrorism threats
had been damaged by leaks to the media.
"The recent investigation in Birmingham into an allegation
that a British serviceman had been targeted by a terrorist network
is but one example of this," said DAC Clarke.
"On the morning of the arrests, almost before the detainees
had arrived at the police stations to which they were being taken
for questioning, it was clear that key details of the investigation
and the evidence had been leaked.
"This damaged the interview strategy of the investigators,
and undoubtedly raised community tensions.
"I have no idea where the leaks came from, but whoever was
responsible should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves."
Public understanding
The counter-terrorism chief said the situation had been made worse
by allegations that police were politically "partial"
after the parliamentary row over extending the time that terror
suspects could be held without charge.
But he also said he was frustrated that while it took a long time
to bring complicated terrorism cases to court, the public were losing
out in their ability to understand what the security services were
trying to tackle.
British law placed restrictions on what officials could say in
public and what the media reported. Foreign media, however, were
publishing and broadcasting details of the same terrorism cases
- details available to the British public via the internet.
"I just wonder if we could be bolder and, dare I say it, trust
juries to distinguish the prejudicial from the probative,"
he said.
"Apart from anything else, I honestly believe that the public
are entitled to know why airport security is becoming ever more
intrusive and inconvenient," he said.
INFOWARS:
BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR MIND
|
