UK Home Office Rejects 'Human Rights Clause' In Surveillance Camera Code

*** ********* *** ****** ** *** Code *** *** ** **** **********, but *** *** **** ** * win *** ***** *** *********. **** also ***** ************** ******* ** *********** ***** ******** ****** ** ******.

"Free ****" *** "******* **** ****** *****"

**** **** ******** ******** ** *** **** ** Sunday:

****** ************ *******, *** ******* ******** that *** ** **** ****** (***** oversees *** *********** *** *** ****) rejected * "***** ****** ******" **** would "*********** ***** *********** ****** ******* from ***** ****** ** ***** ****** abuses" ** *** ******* ************ ****** Code ** ** ********* ** ********** next *****.

"Utterly *******" **** ****** ********** "******"

******* ********* **** *** ******** ****** was ******** ** **** ****** *********, telling **** **** ******* ** ***** "'burden' ******** ***********", ******* *** "******* bemused":

I ** ******* ******* at the response I’ve received from Home Office officials which seems to be based around not wanting to ‘burden’ relevant authorities. If ethics *** **** ** * ‘******’ *** ****** **** ***** ************ **** *’* ****** * **** ****** *** ***** but am hoping that ministers will ask for this to go in the Code when it’s laid before Parliament. It has to be put before MPs and can’t just be brought into law - I sincerely **** **** **** ***’* *** **** ****. [emphasis added]

*******, ******* **** *** **** ****** decision *** "**** *************".

Clause *******, "****** **********"

******* **** *** ****** *** "****** a ***********" **** *********** **** **** account "******* **************" ** ***** *********' practices *** *** "****** **********":

*** ****** * ** ********* **simply * *********** *** ‘******** ***********’ ** **** *** ************* ** *** ******** ******* ************** arising from their operation of surveillance camera systems (including *** *********, ******** *** ********** ** ***** *********). It meets the requirement of being principles-based and would fit naturally under Principle 10 [of the Code which provides for "effective review and audit mechanisms"]. Hardly ********** and hopefully something that most responsible authorities would be doing already.

Surveillance ****** **** *** ********* *********

*** **** ** * ******** ******** which ***** ** *********** (******, **** councils) **** "* **** ** ******" although **** ** ***********/*********** **********. *** more, ********'* *********** ** *** ************ ****** Code ****.

*** **** ** ********** *** ***** update ***** ****** **** ***** ** 2013 ********** ************ ** "***** *** ******* ******* of ************* ************ *** *** ******* practices ** ************ ********* **********", *********** the "********* **********" ** ************ ** Xinjiang*********** ** *** ******* ******* *********:

** **** *** *******, ******* *********** *** ******************* ********* **** *** ******** ***********, which ********* ************* ********* ******** *******, **** ******** ** meet ***** *** ******* ******.

Next ***** ********

*** ******* **** (******* *** '***** rights ******') **** ** ********* ** Parliament **** ***** **** ******* ******* that ****** ******* ** ********** **** to ****** ** ****** ** ****, it **** **** **** *** "*************" under '******** *********'.

*** ******* **** **** **** ********* like ************ ** *** *********, *** told*** **** ** ********** "********* ******** ** ***** ********* should *** ** ********* ** *** streets." *******, **** **** *** ********* have ****** ******* **** **********'* ***** workings ** ******* *** ****** * rejection **.

Home ****** ********

*** ** **** ************* **** ** ****** * ******* response **** ***** ***** *** ******'* scrapping, ******** *** ***** ** *************' ethical ********* ******* *** **:

*** **********, **** *** ***** *************, must ****** **** ****** **** ***** the **** ********** *** *** *** Human ****** *** ******** *** **** using ************ *******.

**** ***** *** * ******** ************ addressing *** **** **** * ******* like ********* *** ****** **** *** relevant ** **** ****** *** **, but *** **** ****************** ** ** ********** "*******" "***** ****** ******" ** Xinjiang ******* *********** ** ********** *** **** ******. The **** ****** *********:

** *** ********* ********** ** ******* to *** **’* **** ********** ******. The ************ ***** ** ******* ******* existing *********** *** *** ************ **** and ***** ***** ** *********** ****:**** **** ****** ************

*** ** *** *** ************* ******* at *** ** ** **** ***** to ******* *** *** ***** ****** violations ** ********. ** **** **** imposed ********* ********* ***** ******* *** travel **** ** ****** ******* ********** officials, *** ********* ******** ** **** ensure ** ** ************* *** ********* in ***** ********** ******* ***** ****** chains.

Win *** ********* *** *****, ******

**** ** ********** * *** *** Dahua *** ********* **** ************* ******** in *** ** ** *** *************' Xinjiang **********, *.*.**********'* ******* ******* ********* ********** **** Hikvision *** ***** ***** ****. (********* *** *** ******* to *** ******* *** *******.)

*** ********* ** **** ****** **** benefits *** ***** ***** ************ ************ linked ** ***** ****** ******.

Endgame ***** *******

** ** ****, **** ******** ** unlikely ** ** **** *** ** remains ******** **** *** **** ****** reject *** ****** **** ** *** in ***** *** ***** ****** ***********. However, *** **** ****** ***** ******** some ** **** ********. **** **** update ***********.