Surely this is a breach of treaty and spying?

caseyann

A BRITISH undercover police officer who infiltrated protest movements across Europe over seven years made several visits to Ireland, during which he spent time with objectors to the Corrib gas project in north Mayo and met protesters opposed to US military use of Shannon airport.


Activists in Ireland have been aware of Kennedy’s real identity since last October. “My main concern is not that the police in the UK and Ireland collect information on activists, but that they sometimes act as agent provocateurs in order to discredit the peace movement,” said anti-war activist Ed Horgan.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0115/1224287577245.html


I find it disturbing to say the least that a foreign law enforcer was spying on Irish civilians.And surely this is against the law?

mgmt

caseyann wrote: »

I find it disturbing to say the least that a foreign law enforcer was spying on Irish civilians.And surely this is against the law?

They were mostly hippie blow-ins at corrib gas field/N3/carrickmines.

caseyann

mgmt wrote: »

They were mostly hippie blow-ins at corrib gas field/N3/carrickmines.

Read the article he did other things aswell.
And i am sure i remember that no policing by foreign police on Irish soil,that is considered act of war.


also took part in the Dublin May Day protests in 2004. Several said he encouraged more confrontational tactics.

Wolfe Tone

I say this happens all the time, disgrace.

whiteonion

It's naive to expect people acting on the behalf of their government to behave lawfully. It's naive to expect governments to behave lawfully.

Wolfe Tone

THE Department of Justice has denied any knowledge of the activities of a British undercover policeman who associated with environmental campaigners at the Corrib pipeline site and assisted with organisation of protests in Dublin.

This week the true identity of PC Mark Kennedy of the London metropolitan police, also known as Mark Stone, was publicly revealed when a court case against six environmental campaigners collapsed in Nottingham.

Pc Kennedy infiltrated the environmental movement in the Nottinghamshire are of England in late 2003. During his time undercover he visited Ireland on at least five occasions, including to address activists gathered in Clare in April 2005 on how to take "direct action" against US flights landing at Shannon airport.

The uncovering of Pc Kennedy’s role in the British radical environmental movement has resulted in demands in the British parliament for a full investigation into "agent provocateur" activities by the police.

Would love to know what he said....

http://www.irishexaminer.ie/ireland/department-denies-knowledge-of-agent-provocateur-141952.html#ixzz1At2BWkIc

GSF

caseyann wrote: »

And i am sure i remember that no policing by foreign police on Irish soil,that is considered act of war.

Maybe thew NYPD officers who visit Ireland should be investigated too? I'm sure a few of those have some questionable associates.

Lets call the US ambassador in to tellhim we are sending the fishing patrol boats up the Patomac

sligopark

to be honest this pales into insignificance when you realise that british operatives help blow up 33 Irish citizens in Monaghan and Dublin once upon a time....

perhaps this is an act of war?

later12

Sounds like a great job to be honest.

OP, breach of which treaty? He was gathering information on activists across Europe, I'm not sure how that is illegal.

I can only imagine that the left wing and SF loons who go in for this sort of thing are only delighted at their own inflated sense of importance to think that there was a fully paid up member of the spying profession assigned to spend time with them in the midst of that ridiculous Rossport situation. I hope it makes the last few wasted years of their lives all the more worth it.

Less of the name calling please people

Fratton Fred

Kind of defeats the purpose of having spies if you don't send them out to spy on people.

If it is an act of war (which I doubt very much it is, as they were spying on a bunch of crusties, not gathering information for an invasion) then I suggest you sign up straight away and do something about it.

Wolfe Tone

In fairness it reads like he was over telling them how to do things "direct action"

caseyann

GSF wrote: »

Maybe thew NYPD officers who visit Ireland should be investigated too? I'm sure a few of those have some questionable associates.

Lets call the US ambassador in to tellhim we are sending the fishing patrol boats up the Patomac

Were they investigating Irish citizens and spying and inciting violence?
Then no NYPD are welcome.

later10 wrote: »

Sounds like a great job to be honest.

OP, breach of which treaty? He was gathering information on activists across Europe, I'm not sure how that is illegal.

I can only imagine that the left wing and SF loons who go in for this sort of thing are only delighted at their own inflated sense of importance to think that there was a fully paid up member of the spying profession assigned to spend time with them in the midst of that ridiculous Rossport situation. I hope it makes the last few wasted years of their lives all the more worth it.

And who assigned him such a job on foreign soil without consent of department of justice.
I think he missed the borders somewhere and forgot only policing allowed done here is when Irish forces and department of justice give them that right to do so.It is a breach of our sovereignty and two fingers to the Irish government and people.
You can dress it you however much you want it,it is against the law.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

In fairness it reads like he was over telling them how to do things "direct action"

Is this the copper that went native? If so, I don't think you can blame anyone but him for his actions.

OS119

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Is this the copper that went native? If so, I don't think you can blame anyone but him for his actions.

i don't think he's 'gone native' in the normal sense of the phrase - rather that Nottinghamshire police were pushing for prosecutions that he didn't think were justified, and when the CPS got hold of the information he'd supplied to Nottinghamshire, but Nottinghamshire hadn't supplied to the CPS, they agreed.

he does seem to be fcuked up - his marriage is over, he's 'resigned' from the Metropolitan Police, and his face has been plastered over every 'alternative' wesbsite on the internet. it seems to be a pretty poor show by the rozzers - an undercover operator who has fallen out with his handlers, an op where the undercover officers knew the identities of the other undercover officers, and an op where shagging around/forming serious emotional attachments seemed to be ok as long as the int kept flowing - all of which are big no-no's.

utterly incompetant, half-arsed, and all a bit non-essential.

later12

caseyann wrote: »

And who assigned him such a job on foreign soil without consent of department of justice.

Someone in the MPS with responsibility for counter terrorism deployment, presumably. I just don't see what's so shocking about this. He was neither spying on the irish state, nor any aspect of its internal policing nor criminal processes, nor was he, as far as I can see, doing anything remotely illegal.

I think he missed the borders somewhere and forgot only policing allowed done here is when Irish forces and department of justice give them that right to do so.

He wasn't policing. He was gathering information on groups that could be a potential concern to the MPS in terms of their counter terrorism intelligence, a worthy concern in light of the common travel area, in my opinion.

It is a breach of our sovereignty and two fingers to the Irish government and people.

Yada yada yada. I asked you to to back up your suggestion that it is illegal or a breach of Treaty, as per the thread title. So, apart from posting some ideological rant about sovereignty, what is your answer?

caseyann

later10 wrote: »

Someone in the MPS with responsibility for counter terrorism deployment, presumably. I just don't see what's so shocking about this. He was neither spying on the irish state, nor any aspect of its internal policing nor criminal processes, nor was he, as far as I can see, doing anything remotely illegal.

He wasn't policing. He was gathering information on groups that could be a potential concern to the MPS in terms of their counter terrorism intelligence, a worthy concern in light of the common travel area, in my opinion.

Yada yada yada. I asked you to to back up your suggestion that it is illegal or a breach of Treaty, as per the thread title. So, apart from posting some ideological rant about sovereignty, what is your answer?

Without knowledge of Irish government or law enforcement.Against the law.He has no right to be gathering information on any groups in Ireland.

expectationlost

OS119 wrote: »

i don't think he's 'gone native' in the normal sense of the phrase - rather that Nottinghamshire police were pushing for prosecutions that he didn't think were justified, and when the CPS got hold of the information he'd supplied to Nottinghamshire, but Nottinghamshire hadn't supplied to the CPS, they agreed.

he does seem to be fcuked up - his marriage is over, he's 'resigned' from the Metropolitan Police, and his face has been plastered over every 'alternative' wesbsite on the internet. it seems to be a pretty poor show by the rozzers - an undercover operator who has fallen out with his handlers, an op where the undercover officers knew the identities of the other undercover officers, and an op where shagging around/forming serious emotional attachments seemed to be ok as long as the int kept flowing - all of which are big no-no's.

utterly incompetant, half-arsed, and all a bit non-essential.

he didn't go native he was planning to set up his own spying company

later12

caseyann wrote: »

Without knowledge of Irish government or law enforcement.Against the law.

What law?

He has no right to be gathering information on any groups in Ireland.

What law are you talking about?

sligopark

Not being smart but in the grander scheme of things does it matter if some eco warrior was gathering info on our shores?

OS119

caseyann wrote: »

Without knowledge of Irish government or law enforcement.Against the law.He has no right to be gathering information on any groups in Ireland.

doesn't he? three issues leap to mind: firstly that its quite likely that while he may have operated in Ireland, he will have been interested in UK citizens or residents who were also operating Ireland - so not interested in Ireland per se, just following his quarry when they go to Ireland, and leaving when they leave, second is quite how different is this issue to a UK journalist working for a UK newspaper collecting information on Irish events? and thirdly, his matrimonial home is in Ireland - difficult to suggest he has no business in Ireland....

i don't know the law - and i suspect you don't either.

Wolfe Tone

OS119 wrote: »

doesn't he? three issues leap to mind: firstly that its quite likely that while he may have operated in Ireland, he will have been interested in UK citizens or residents who were also operating Ireland - so not interested in Ireland per se, just following his quarry when they go to Ireland, and leaving when they leave, second is quite how different is this issue to a UK journalist working for a UK newspaper collecting information on Irish events? and thirdly, his matrimonial home is in Ireland - difficult to suggest he has no business in Ireland....

i don't know the law - and i suspect you don't either.

That doesnt matter, it was a foreign police force, no right to be operating here.

later12

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

That doesnt matter, it was a foreign police force, no right to be operating here.

He was not policing, which would be illegal. He was gathering information. On what legal basis are you suggesting that he had no right to do so?

Wolfe Tone

later10 wrote: »

He was not policing, which would be illegal. He was gathering information. On what legal basis are you suggesting that he had no right to do so?

Ive spent most of today studying Tort law, Im not trawling through statutes and crap again. Suffice to say a foreign police force cnnot operate within another countries borders. Without permission. Just look at the PSNI in the north.

later12

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Ive spent most of today studying Tort law, Im not trawling through statutes and crap again.

First day perhaps? You went looking into Tort Law to understand international protocols in policing? Can I firstly ask why, exactly, you have been reading tort?

Suffice to say a foreign police force cnnot operate within another countries borders. Without permission. Just look at the PSNI in the north.

Expand on that? What's the PSNI got to do with this case? I'm not aware of any legal reason why this would be called into serious question.

Perhaps you might look into Public and European Law.

Wolfe Tone

later10 wrote: »

First day perhaps? You went looking into Tort Law to understand international protocols in policing? Can I firstly ask why, exactly, you have been reading tort?

Im a law student.

Expand on that? What's the PSNI got to do with this case? I'm not aware of any legal reason why this would be called into serious question.

Perhaps you might look into Public and European Law.

The PSNI are not allowed to operate outside the six counties without express permission. And vice versa with the Gardaí.

What jurisdiction would they have? None.

later12

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Im a law student.

And to repeat my question, what statutes or what legislation, exactly, would one be trawling through out of tort law on the issue of policing? Really.

The PSNI are not allowed to operate outside the six counties without express permission. And vice versa with the Gardaí.

They are perfectly entitled to gather information here as per the MPS policeman, but not to police. What legislation are you referring to?

sligopark

later10 wrote: »

They are perfectly entitled to gather information here as per the MPS policeman, but not to police.

and did so as per the Omagh investigation

Wolfe Tone

later10 wrote: »

And to repeat my question, what statutes or what legislation, exactly, would one be trawling through out of tort law on the issue of policing? Really.

I never said it was in relation to police at all. Seen as you are so curious it was mostly defamation and false imprisonment. Seen as I spent the day researching, reading cases etc, I really cant be arsed to do it again.

They are perfectly entitled to gather information here as per the MPS policeman, but not to police. What legislation are you referring to?

Are they entitled to come over and attempt to incite people? Fair enough, prove me wrong, back that up.

later12

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

I never said it was in relation to police at all.

Fair enough, then why mention it? It wouldn't be unreasonable to presume that you thought it was relevant, since we were discussing an issue surrounding the relevant legislation. I spent the day looking for my mobile phone and then I walked the dog in case anyone is wondering.

Nobody is entitled to come over here and 'incite' people to employ the vagueness of that term. Bear in mind that allegation was made by a campaigner, it's impossible to know if the policeman even attended a may day protest, these things have a habit of growing legs.

Back up the allegation and then I'll entertain it.


In the mean time, I'm still waiting to hear about the relevant legislation of which this man is allegedly in breach. Answers on a post card to Nothing Remotely Expected, Still Waiting, Boards.ie.

caseyann

later10 wrote: »

Fair enough, then why mention it? It wouldn't be unreasonable to presume that you thought it was relevant, since we were discussing an issue surrounding the relevant legislation. I spent the day looking for my mobile phone and then I walked the dog in case anyone is wondering.

Nobody is entitled to come over here and 'incite' people to employ the vagueness of that term. Bear in mind that allegation was made by a campaigner, it's impossible to know if the policeman even attended a may day protest, these things have a habit of growing legs.

Back up the allegation and then I'll entertain it.


In the mean time, I'm still waiting to hear about the relevant legislation of which this man is allegedly in breach. Answers on a post card to Nothing Remotely Expected, Still Waiting, Boards.ie.

Seriously go dig through the laws in Ireland for yourself,way to much stuff to go through.
But as i recall you are not allowed to obtain any information on foreign soil without the authorities say so as an acting police man or investigator.
They want an investigation to why he was in Ireland and investigating or inciting radical behavior.Read the articles.If you dont think its wrong for him to be in our country investigating inciting under false name and without the department of justice and authorities knowledge,then thats up to you.

Kennedy says he would travel abroad with fellow activists, and feed information back to his British superiors to share with other nations. ‘Activism has no borders,’ he says. ‘I would never go abroad without authority from my superiors and the local police.’

From another site
http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?p=110622

It appears all the spying he was doing in Ireland was going directly to the desk of Tony Blair

The Gardaí knew full well that he was a spy( so he says)
If that was the case i wouldnt have a problem so long as he was given permission to do so.But if he wasnt it is in fact against the law as he was working as a police man without consent of the state.

OhNoYouDidn't

later10 wrote: »

He was not policing, which would be illegal. He was gathering information. On what legal basis are you suggesting that he had no right to do so?

An agent of a foreign state gathering information on a false name and false premise without the knowledge of local law enforcement is textbook espionage.

Whats worse is he appears to have been trying to direct the protesters towards a more militant and violent approach

This all hinges on whether the Gardaí had given permission. If they had, we should be asking why they are employing agent provoceturs, if not, there is a serious explanation owed from the London Met.

Fratton Fred

According to the telegraph this Sunday Kennedy worked all over Europe and it is believed he had a German handler.

AGS are keeping very quiet about all this......

Iwasfrozen

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

An agent of a foreign state gathering information on a false name and false premise without the knowledge of local law enforcement is textbook espionage.

Whats worse is he appears to have been trying to direct the protesters towards a more militant and violent approach

This all hinges on whether the Gardaí had given permission. If they had, we should be asking why they are employing agent provoceturs, if not, there is a serious explanation owed from the London Met.

Even if they didn't have the permission of the Garda there is very little we could do about it. Like it or not the UK is the regional power and permanent member of the UN security council so no interntional court would convict them.

OhNoYouDidn't

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Even if they didn't have the permission of the Garda there is very little we could do about it. Like it or not the UK is the regional power and permanent member of the UN security council so no interntional court would convict them.

Irrelevant to what is being discussed.

Later10 seems to be arguing that this chaps activities are legal. If he didn't have AGS permission, it wasn't. How we react to that is a seperate debate.

But as FF says, an ominious silence is emanating from the Park.

Iwasfrozen

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Irrelevant to what is being discussed.

Later10 seems to be arguing that this chaps activities are legal. If he didn't have AGS permission, it wasn't. How we react to that is a seperate debate.

But as FF says, an ominious silence is emanating from the Park.

Exactly, I have little time for the hippy corrib gas field protestors but I don't believe that MI5 has the right to spy on such groups. Not that a group of hippies are even a threat to security anyway.

pablomakaveli

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

Exactly, I have little time for the hippy corrib gas field protestors but I don't believe that MI5 has the right to spy on such groups. Not that a group of hippies are even a threat to security anyway.

I believe the anarchist group "The Wombles" were involved in those protests so there is more of a dangerous element there then you'd think.

OhNoYouDidn't

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I believe the anarchist group "The Wombles" were involved in those protests so there is more of a dangerous element there then you'd think.

...made even more dangerous by the fact someone was trying to organise them towords more violent tactics....

nacho libre

It's not the first time and it won't be the last. There was thread on here some time back about the myriad of foreign intelligence agencies that were operating here in the eighties. do we really believe the situation isn't the same today? if anyone from G2 wants to comment please feel free do so.

But seriously with this latest revelation, you'd just wonder if some of the more outrageous actions of far left groups that raise the opprobrium level of the public are all they seem. could it be that people like Kennedy actively encourage and help excute such events to discredit these groups?

later12

caseyann wrote: »

Seriously go dig through the laws in Ireland for yourself,way to much stuff to go through.

There is nothing. What happened was not in breach of the legislation. You are the one contesting that, therefore the onus is on you to back up your case.

Why are you suggesting that what happened was illegal?

OhNoYouDidn't

later10 wrote: »

There is nothing. What happened was not in breach of the legislation. You are the one contesting that, therefore the onus is on you to back up your case.

Why are you suggesting that what happened was illegal?

The Defence Act for starters.

Offences Against the State act for main course.

The Treason Act 1939 for dessert.

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The Defence Act for starters.

Offences Against the State act for main course.

The Treason Act 1939 for dessert.

Which bits?

Wolfe Tone

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Which bits?

Im sure you can read them for yourself, have fun.

Fratton Fred

MUSSOLINI wrote: »

Im sure you can read them for yourself, have fun.

I can thanks, but the onus is one the one making the claim, surely?

OhNoYouDidn't

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Which bits?

I'm not getting into clauses because you really don't need it explained to you that spying is generally illegal

But the Defence Act strictly limits foreign power's agents activities

The Offences Against the State act deal with espionage

The Treason Act would apply to any Irish citizen who assited either of the above

Het-Field

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The Defence Act for starters.

Offences Against the State act for main course.

The Treason Act 1939 for dessert.

I think you are taking a stab in the dark at that one.

If what is said by the OP is the case, I dont believe he has transgressed any clause of the OATSA. The bulk of the act deals with suppression orders, secret and proscribed organisations, and the publication of documents. I think you quoted the name of this statute on an unfounded belief that what you are looking for would be there.

later12

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I'm not getting into clauses because you really don't need it explained to you that spying is generally illegal

But the Defence Act strictly limits foreign power's agents activities

The Offences Against the State act deal with espionage

The Treason Act would apply to any Irish citizen who assited either of the above

There is no such thing in either The Defence Act, or the Offences Against The State Act, and like the above post, I would suggest that at this stage, like other posters, you are merely dealing in guesswork.

As for The Treason Act, it's not really clear why you're actually even bringing that up; presumably it sounded about right to you.

So go on... where is this contrary to the legislation?

OhNoYouDidn't

later10 wrote: »

There is no such thing in either The Defence Act, or the Offences Against The State Act, and like the above post, I would suggest that at this stage, like other posters, you are merely dealing in guesswork.

As for The Treason Act, it's not really clear why you're actually even bringing that up; presumably it sounded about right to you.

So go on... where is this contrary to the legislation?

Are you suggesting there are NO statutes banning espionage in Ireland?

later12

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Are you suggesting there are NO statutes banning espionage in Ireland?

No... I'm suggesting that you're guessing about something that I don't think you understand. Frankly I don't care whether you claim to know a lot about the law or whether you don't, it is irrelevant.

All that anybody is asking, is that if you're suggesting that there is a breach of the legislation, that you at least point to or produce a link toward that legislation. I can't help but notice that in the time you've taken to respond, and respond again to this thread, you could have quite easily done so, yet have not.

Het-Field

later10 wrote: »

No... I'm suggesting that you're guessing about something that I don't think you understand. Frankly I don't care whether you claim to know a lot about the law or whether you don't, it is irrelevant.

All that anybody is asking, is that if you're suggesting that there is a breach of the legislation, that you at least point to or produce a link toward that legislation. I can't help but notice that in the time you've taken to respond, and respond again to this thread, you could have quite easily done so, yet have not.

He doesnt. He tries this all the time.

Fratton Fred

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

I'm not getting into clauses because you really don't need it explained to you that spying is generally illegal

But the Defence Act strictly limits foreign power's agents activities

The Offences Against the State act deal with espionage

The Treason Act would apply to any Irish citizen who assited either of the above

But the thing is, he wasn't spying on anything to do with the State. He was gathering information on a group of eco campaigners, not the Irish Defence Force. The guy is an undercover policeman, not James Bond.

IF he didn't have permission from AGS to be in Ireland, then it warrants a very irate phone call from one chief of police to another, people on here seem to think the UN needs to get involved.