Back to index of Nerve 8 - Spring 2006

Unfair Cop - Who's Policing the Police?

By Bob Iddon

What kind of police service do we want, who should decide that and how?
These three questions were asked by Metropolitan Police commissioner Sir Ian Blair in a televised lecture in December last year. This is a man who has admitted to lying about the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes - the innocent electrician viciously gunned down on the London tube system in July. Why is he allowed to speak about the organisation of the police force? Why is he to be trusted with this power? Who decides what constitutes criminal behaviour?

He started his speech with the question, 'What kind of police service do we want?'
He then went on to say it was actually three interlinked questions that needed to be asked.
He also made reference to the 2012 Olympics, and how the Met was involved in the bid, no doubt to reassure the moneymen that their investment was safe in his hands.

However, in response to his three questions:
The kind of police service that we want Sir Ian, is one that upholds the fundamental rights of all humans and one that gives everybody recourse to the law and I mean everyone, not just the people who can afford it, so that for once in this country's history the people can have some justice.

I know some of you will be thinking here we go again, someone else having a go at our police when they do such a good job, but do they? I'm not saying all cops are bad people, but are they there for you? I suppose it depends where you are on the social ladder as to the way you answer that question.

In fact Sir Ian made comment about which social class the police are there for when he quoted Sir Richard Mayne, one of the twin commissioners appointed by Sir Robert Peel (yet another knight of the realm). 'The primary objectives of an efficient police force were to be the prevention of crime and the preservation of public tranquillity'. He went on to say, 'However worthy those ideals, these were not a police for the whole people but a police to protect the better off from what were described by Victorian commentators as the dangerous classes'.

In my eyes, Sir Ian, nothing has changed since those days, because myself and many others around me feel that they have been classed as one of the dangerous.

Why do we feel like this? Well, if like me you were one of the millions of people who were against the war in Iraq, and one of the hundreds and hundreds of thousands who took part in the anti-war demos you will know exactly what I mean. We are under constant attack from new laws and legislations attempting to undermine freedom of speech. For pity's sake, they can even lock you up now without charge under their so-called anti-terror laws. Who makes these laws? Surprise, surprise, the very same people who wage war on poor people around the world and the same people who supply the weapons of mass destruction that the poor Iraqi people were accused of having. But that's another article!

Jean Charles de Menezes was the latest victim to join a very long list of people to die at the hands of the police. Since 1993 there have been 926 deaths in police custody, pursuits and armed response situations. Compared to national murder rates, approximately 8,000 in the same time period, this may seem a small amount. But considering that 60% of the accused murderers were brought to justice and that not one police officer has been brought to justice, even where an unlawful killing verdict has been ruled by an inquest, then these figures are just unacceptable. The police are arresting people accused of murder on the streets, but fail to arrest, investigate and try the accused in their own force. Is it any wonder that there is no justice for the families of these people when the police are left to investigate themselves? Surely this should be done by the courts and be judged by the people?

We are constantly bombarded with fear from the mainstream media that the youth of this country are nothing but 'happy-slapping' hooded yobs, that every man wielding a camera is a paedophile and that we are also constantly under the threat of Muslim terrorist groups. The irony is that this has been totally contrived by the government’s spin department in the hope that it will secure votes. The main perpetrator of unlawful acts at present in this country is in fact the government itself. Is it not our police force that investigates criminal acts? Then why are Tony Blair and all the other MPs who supported the war not being investigated by the police? After all there is a great deal of evidence to support a major investigation into the many wrong doings perpetrated by Tony Blair's government. Tony Blair and his cabinet should be brought before the courts for crimes against humanity.

As to who should decide the kind of police we have, it has to be us, the people of Britain whom the police force is supposed to be committed to serving and protecting from any one who puts us in danger, no matter who they are. Considering that we pay their wages, I do not think that this is too much to ask for. And as to how we should do this, it has to be done at local levels. Not by amalgamating regional forces, as is the current move.

So when Tony Blair says that there is no respect, is it any wonder? A government and a police force should rule by example. From what I can see, neither has any respect for anyone or anything.

Sir Ian Blair's speech can be downloaded from www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/pressreleases/stories/2005/11_november/16/dimbleby.shtml
Also see "Injustice - A film about the struggles for justice by the families of people that have died in police custody." www.injusticefilm.co.uk