{"id":50395,"date":"2021-02-23T08:44:33","date_gmt":"2021-02-23T08:44:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/jacobinmag.com\/2021\/02\/chis-bill-uk-criminal-conduct-national-security\/"},"modified":"2021-02-25T15:47:44","modified_gmt":"2021-02-25T15:47:44","slug":"britains-government-has-decided-no-one-should-police-the-police","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/radiofree.asia\/2021\/02\/23\/britains-government-has-decided-no-one-should-police-the-police\/","title":{"rendered":"Britain\u2019s Government Has Decided No One Should Police the Police"},"content":{"rendered":"\n \n\n\n\n

A bill pushed by Britain's Tory government will pave the way for security and law enforcement agents to commit crimes with no risk of being prosecuted. The move follows revelations of appalling police abuses against environmental, anti-racist, and trade union activists \u2014 yet Keir Starmer's Labour Party has abstained rather than opposed the bill.<\/h3>\n\n\n
\n \n
\n Armed police in Cardiff, 2014. (Matthew Horwood \/ Getty Images)\n <\/figcaption> \n<\/figure>\n\n\n\n\n \n

One of the most disturbing pieces of legislation in living memory is making its way through the UK Houses of Parliament.<\/p>\n

If it becomes law \u2014 an increasingly likely prospect \u2014 this Covert Human Intelligence Sources bill (CHIS) will \u201cauthorise conduct by officials and agents of the security and intelligence services, law enforcement, and certain other public authorities, which would otherwise constitute criminality.\u201d<\/p>\n

In essence, the law would allow officials in a myriad of government departments and agencies to approve officers, agents, and assets to commit criminal offenses without any risk of being sued or prosecuted. The particular offenses that could be authorized are not listed in the bill. However, repeated amendments that sought to ensure at least some constraints \u2014 such as prohibiting the authorization of rape, torture or murder, or restricting the use of children and the vulnerable as assets authorized to commit crimes \u2014 have all been defeated.<\/p>\n

The proposed law has a sweeping scope. Under this bill, criminal conduct can be authorized if it is deemed to be<\/a> in the interests of national security; done for the purposes of preventing or detecting crime or of preventing disorder; or in the interests of the economic well-being of the UK.<\/p>\n

Shami Chakrabarti, a member of the House of Lords (also known as a peer) told<\/a> Tribune <\/i>in January that the CHIS bill is \u201cone of the most dangerous that [she\u2019s] ever seen.\u201d Chakrabarti once worked<\/a> with the Home Office as a lawyer and later headed up the human rights group Liberty. She attempted to amend the CHIS bill when it came to the Lords after it passed through the House of Commons in October.<\/p>\n

The Home Office\u2019s \u201cFact Sheet\u201d states that<\/a> \u201conly\u201d the intelligence agencies, the National Crime Agency, the police, HM Revenue and Customs, the armed forces, and \u201cten other public authorities\u201d will be permitted to authorize criminal conduct under the bill. Yet these ten include<\/a> (see pp. 16\u201317) such varied bodies as the Gambling Commission, Food Standards Agency, the Environmental Agency, and the Department of Health and Social Care.<\/p>\n\n \n\n \n \n \n

Thwarted Amendments<\/h2>\n \n

On January 21, in what proved to be a short-lived (and partial) victory for defenders of civil liberties, the House of Lords revised the bill by introducing a series of safeguards<\/a>. Among other things, their amendments restricted using children, vulnerable persons, or victims of modern slavery or trafficking as assets who could be authorized to commit crimes, outside of \u201cexceptional circumstances.\u201d<\/p>\n

Lords amendments also prohibited the authorization of sexual violence, torture, murder, and perverting the course of justice by state agents or their assets. Another amendment sought to ensure that any authorization for criminal conduct must satisfy a “reasonableness\u201d test. But when these changes were reviewed by the Commons, all of the amendments were removed.<\/p>\n