A prominent Queensland civil rights advocate and lawyer has raised concerns about the photographing and surveillance of pro-Palestine protesters by the state’s police force.
Guardian Australia has seen photos and videos of Queensland police officers photographing protesters at a pro-Palestine demonstration in Logan in December.
Nick Outram, a legal observer for the volunteer group Action Ready, has attended several pro-Palestine protests since November in Brisbane and Logan.
He says he has also witnessed police writing down the number plates of cars with Palestinian flags on them.
“We’re concerned about the ongoing collection of data by police, what it’s being used for and how long it is stored,” he said.
“There’s quite a risk already of being tainted with attending a protest that was completely peaceful.
“You would expect that there would be full transparency rather than hiding behind operational practice. Especially regarding civil rights right to privacy.”
Lawyer and long-serving vice president of Queensland’s Civil Liberties Council, Terry O’Gorman, said there was no justification for police filming peaceful protesters and police and the government should stop this immediately.
“Peaceful street protest is as much, if not more, a part of what constitutes a democracy than voting every three or four years. It is a bedrock of democracy,” he said.
O’Gorman said the police monitoring protesters was reflective of “the gradual chipping away at the right to peaceful protest” throughout Australia.
“Queensland has a history that not too far in the past of police engaging activities, particularly in the 70s and 80s, where they totally shut down protesting,” O’Gorman said.
“It is one thing for police to video a protest where there are arrests in order to get evidence for court cases but to video as a matter of course is simply a return in another manner to the protest patterns of the 70s and 80s.”
The Greens MP Michael Berkman wrote to the police minister in December raising concerns about police deploying “excessive surveillance tactics” towards pro-Palestine protesters and urging the government to end the practice.
“The practice cannot be justified in the context of peaceful assemblies where no offences have been committed,” Berkman said.
“A person’s decision to attend a peaceful assembly should not subject them to the increased scrutiny of law enforcement, merely because of their attendance, nor should it lead to a situation where QPS holds information about their movements, their potential beliefs and opinions, or other personal information.”
Berkman said it was not the police’s job to surveil or restrict peaceful protests.
“I’m concerned that this excessive surveillance could discourage or limit free participation in peaceful protests, especially for marginalised and vulnerable groups,” he said.
A Queensland police spokesperson said “the nature of some events requires significant threat and risk assessments, which need to be continually undertaken to protect the safety of all persons”.
The spokesperson said the wearing of body-worn cameras and “use of mobile devices” by officers at protests is “sound operational practice and not unique to any particular group, community or issue-based assembly.”
They said officers “routinely record actions, vehicles and persons at such events to both support the peaceful assembly and to ensure a record of attendees or behaviour exists should they be required.”
“This can include observing persons, monitoring vehicles that may pose a risk and narratives posted on social media platforms,” the spokesperson said.
The Queensland police minister, Mark Ryan, said he expected the force to act in the best interests of community safety.
“Along with other Queenslanders, I expect the Queensland Police Service to be consistent when engaging with protest groups and to act in the best interests of community safety,” he said.
“In respect of the matters raised, I am advised that there is no evidence to suggest that the Queensland Police Service has acted contrary to this expectation.”
