It is an unprecedented case. And it risks triggering an unprecedented threat to journalism. The UK police have repeatedly tried to obtain the passwords to the phones of the British independent journalist, Richard Medhurst, the first reporter arrested in London under Section 12: his analyses and comments on Israel’s bloodbath in Gaza – which Amnesty International has characterised as genocide – have been interpreted by the police as support for organisations banned from the UK, such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
The British journalists’ union, the NUJ, and the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) publicly condemned his arrest and the use of anti-terrorism laws against journalists “simply for carrying out their work”.
I dislike Richard Medhurst for a whole bunch of reasons.
Pro-Assad, pro use of child soldiers (as long as it’s the side he supports anyway), has expressed he wants to ethnically cleanse Israelis, is an avid supporter of China and denier of the Uighur genocide, is a contributor to and paid by PressTV (Iranian government owned news), is a contributer to and paid by Russia Today, believes NATO are the aggressors in the Russia-Ukraine war, etc.
There’s also allegations from two women that he groomed them while they were teenagers, but as this is unproven I will assume his innocence on that one.
I don’t think of this person as a journalist at all. He’s a hack. A hack that has shown support of more than one proscribed terrorist institutions.
But I do believe you should have a fundamental right to privacy and not having to give your passwords up. Failing to give up his password should result in no extra charges against him IMO.
Medhurst is not necessarily pro Assad, moreso anti Israel and US imperialism. A big motivation I heard him speak on was the Arab spring which was hijacked by the US to install dictatorships all over MENA.
And the assassination of Gadaffi which would bring so called freedom but served US interest and destroyed Libya.
He’s definitely pro-Assad. He’s consistently said sanctions against Assad-led Syria need to be lifted, lied about humanitarian aid from the west not being sent to Syria (it has), denied that Assad’s government used chemical weapons on their own citizens (they provably did), and said that Assad’s government was democratic (lol), secular (lol), and welcoming to all people (lol), whereas the new government is evil. He also said that in kicking out Assad they had chosen to become subservient to Israel and NATO – a position not only completely absurd and pro-Assad, but also dog-whistling the conspiracy theory that Jews are controlling the world.
Medhurst just looks to what western nations think and supports the opposite, regardless of whether they’re right or wrong. He’s a misinformation spreader literally paid by Russia and Iran (through his work for RT and PressTV). He’s no journalist. He’s a tankie.
But like I said, I do believe he should have the right to keep his password to himself if he desires. Doing so should lead to no extra charges.
E: I know Lemmy has a serious tankie problem, but come on. Support of Assad too? Really, Lemmy? Sometimes you’re worse than Reddit.
Not that his position is right or defensible in any way, but saying “become subservient to Israel” when talking about the Middle East isn’t a dog whistle; it’s just a (true or not otherwise) statement of fact. Saying they’re subservient to America would be more accurate, but a number of Arab states can, in fact, be described as subservient to Israel
None of that has anything to do with the case at hand though, and I don’t understand why you would bring it up. This bad law is being abused and just because you don’t like the person being targeted in this specific instance, it will just be a matter of time before it’s used to target journalists that you like.
I understand that ultimately argued against what the government is doing to him, but I think all the other information you posted (with no sources at all by the way) is not relevant at all and just a pointless distraction.
I was agreeing with the sentiment that privacy is paramount. On this instance, I’m literally on his side, despite him being a pro-Russia/Assad/China tankie. A political persuasion that I find utterly evil and repulsive.
The point of bringing it up was that even if you don’t like someone or what they stand for, they should still have rights, such as the right to privacy. To me it’s inalienable.