Fw: [UK Left Network] is anyone listening?

Jim Drysdale jimd48 at btinternet.com
Thu Apr 25 01:54:32 MDT 2002


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Metcalf <revopermin at ukonline.co.uk>
To: UK_Left_Network at yahoogroups.com <UK_Left_Network at yahoogroups.com>
Cc: raju bhatt <r.bhatt at bhattmurphy.demon.co.uk>; Pierre Makhlouf
<pierre at hclc.totalserve.co.uk>; Nicki Jameson <nickirensten at hotmail.com>;
Direct Action Collective <da at direct-action.org.uk>; CARF
<info at carf.demon.co.uk>
Date: 27 May 2002 11:33
Subject: [UK Left Network] is anyone listening?


>IS ANYONE LISTENING?
>
>
>
>Telecommunications Interception
>
>&
>
>Intrusive Surveillance
>
>Used to Harass Targeted Individuals
>
>
>
>
>
>Have you been defending someone who has been the victim of a Miscarriage of
Justice?
>
>
>As a consequence, have you experienced surveillance and interference with
your telephones and/or your mail?
>
>
>If the answer to both questions is yes, then your help is needed.
>
>
>
>Please read on
>
>Statement from Malcolm Kennedy
>
>Given that there are over 950 Police and Government Agencies (this figure
does not include the Security Services, GCHQ and The Secret Service) that
can conduct intrusive surveillance against targeted individuals it is hardly
surprising that stories of widespread abuse are emerging almost on a monthly
basis.
>
>
>I was the defendant in a high profile case that [1] has been completely
dealt with, however for the last 5 years I have been subjected to highly
intrusive surveillance and constant interference with my telephones. My
business, which is telephone dependent, is constantly interfered with. [2]
>
>
>I know of one person, who gave evidence about police drug dealing, whose
phones were so extensively interfered with that no customer could get
through by telephone. I also know of one group, who protest about and
support miscarriage of justice cases, where some members have complained
about being harassed by interference with their phones. I am aware of
rumours that other people and groups have similar concerns.
>
>
>In 1998 I complained to the Interception of Communications Tribunal, my
complaint was not upheld, however it should be noted that the Interception
of Communications Tribunal had never upheld a complaint at that time.
>
>
>Also in 1998 I made a complaint to the Metropolitan Police about the
interference with my phones, the officer assigned to the case was an officer
who himself complained that he was being harassed by the Met police from
within. The investigation failed and the officer concluded that he had
carried out a full investigation within the constraints of the 1998
Interception of Communications Act and could find nothing to my determent (I
understand that under the Act, if there was a warrant issued, the police
were not allowed to investigate complaints about interception legally
carried out).
>
>
>In the summer of 2000 an article appeared in Lobster magazine [3] that
outlined some of the harassment I complained of, including the fact that new
customers couldn't get through. After the article, the nature of the
harassment was changed in that I started to receive high daily levels of
incoming nuisance telephone calls (up to 40 in one day on occasions). [4]
>
>
>In 2001 Liberty took up my complaint about interference with my phones and
ongoing harassment, and violations of my Human Rights. My complaint has
arrived at the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, together with Liberty's own
complaint and the Irish Civil Liberty's Watch complaint. I am claiming that
my case has no National Security issues attached to it, and therefore it is
unreasonable for the state to block disclosure of materials/data.
>
>
>I hope that with a few people confirming that they have suffered some form
of harassment, the Tribunal will be forced to ensure that the harassment is
stopped and people's Human Rights are respected by state agencies. In a way
this a ground breaking case and no one may get another crack at it for the
next 10 to 20 years, unless they have a million pounds of so to spend on
lawyers.
>
>
>This is the first time the Investigatory Powers Tribunal has sat to
consider a complaint and they will have to resolve issues about the levels
of secrecy demanded by the Courts, Police and Security Services and their
compatibility to the Human Rights Act.
>
>
>On the 14 December 2001 the Tribunal sat in-camera for a directions
hearing, MI5, GCHQ, MI6 were represented by their own solicitors, the
Treasury solicitor acted for the State and the Police. There is another
Directions Hearing due to be held on the 11 and 12 of July 2002 to decide
what evidence can be heard in Open Court and what evidence will be heard in
secret. To quote Lord Justice Mummery (President) of the Investigatory
Powers Tribunal "faced with a fundamental challenge to the whole operation,
we are going to have to play it very carefully".
>
>
>The hearing will be held 11 & 12 July in Court 6, of the Employment Appeal
Tribunal, Audit House, 58 Victoria Embankment, London, EC4 (nearest tube
Blackfriars).
>
>
>As it seems to be traditional for Government's, Tribunals and the Courts to
dismiss complaints about harassment by state agencies, I intend to put
forward and cite many complaints from different individuals, who say their
phones are/have been interfered. In doing so I hope to convince the Courts
that this type of abuse and harassment does go on.
>
>
>As the hearing is less than a few weeks away it is proposed, at this stage,
to seek complaints only from those defending victims of miscarriages of
justice. If you recognise yourself as someone who has experienced telephone
harassment, whilst defending a miscarriage of justice victim, then I would
like to request your assistance
>
>
>If you have had your phones and/or /mail interfered with, have been
harassed or know of anyone who has please give details in the form of a
letter or brief statement to Mark Metcalf. Mark, and others, have supported
me since 1993 through a trial, prison sentence, an appeal and when I was
released from prison in June 1996. I can think of no one better to hold your
confidence should you care to confide in him. As time is now of the essence
I would urge you to do so as quickly as possible.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>In addition to using the materials at the hearing in July it is intended to
give details of the information we have complied to some journalists, who we
feel will treat the issue with the seriousness it deserves. (This will be
done without identifying anyone, except for allowing the journalists to
contact you if need be to confirm that you have suffered interference with
you phones/mail) In all these matters we will fully respect people's wishes
and needs.
>
>
>Regards,
>
>
>Malcolm Kennedy
>
>
>
>
>[1] 'Who Killed Patrick Quinn? The Framing of Malcolm Kennedy' December
1994 by Hackney Community Defence Association. This and other materials
relating to the case will appear on the www.red-star-research.org.uk site by
the end of May 2002
>
>
>[2] See June 2000, which is issue 40 of Lobster - 'The Malcolm Kennedy
Story' at www.lobster-magazine.co.uk
>
>
>[3] As above
>
>
>[4] See Lobster 41, the Summer 2001 issue- 'The Malcolm Kennedy case - an
update' www.lobster-magazine.co.uk
>
>
>
>
>Mark Metcalf can be contacted on either 07967 886257 or by email at
revopermin at ukonline.co.uk or revopermin at hotmail.com or by mail at RPM
Publications, BM Box 3328, London WC1N 3XX
>
>
>Malcolm Kennedy can be contacted at malcolmk at pop3.poptel.org.uk



~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.



More information about the Marxism mailing list