Originally this piece was going to be completely different. It would have included a really neat photo op which I saw the other day as I was walking through the PATH. If you were to have seen the photo it would have depicted a miniature mock soccer stadium with bleachers facing each other, flags of many countries, and two large projection televisions in the centre showing a game from the World Cup of Soccer. You would have noticed that it was in the basement of an office tower, and that the people crowded around were business men and women on their lunch breaks, enjoying a bit of the game. And most importantly, you would have realized that someone came up with this fine idea and decided to rent some bleachers and some televisions, and to decorate the whole place and make it feel festive, overshadowing the otherwise cold granite-lined hallways so typical of buildings in the financial district.
But I couldn't write that piece. Because just as soon as I got out my camera to capture a moment and digitise a fragment of this out-of-place yet completely wonderful concept, I was accosted by a security guard.
"No photos please.", he said. Or something to that effect. I didn't argue, because I realized that he was just the messenger, and the ridiculous decision to prevent people from using their cameras in what is essentially a public place was not made by this man. "Um, okay.", I muttered in a semi-rude tone as I put my camera back into the pouch on my belt and continued on my way. As I walked the rest of the way to my destination I started thinking about rights, privacy, and photography. And I got to thinking about ideas for a covert camera that could be used anywhere.
But as I continued on my way I felt nervous, guilty, and upset that our society has begun to adopt heightened security measures apparently designed for our protection. I felt as though I had attempted to do something wrong, or something immoral. Instead I was simply interested in capturing a unique moment so that I could share it with others and show them what I had seen.
As more heightened security measures are imposed, presumably in response to the fear of terrorism, a great disservice to our society results. Average photography enthusiasts like myself are made to feel like criminals for doing what seems only nature when presented with a colourful or interesting scene. And the public in general is subjected to layers of rules and regulations that extend far beyond the law of the land. Rules that govern how people must act in privately-owned public places. It would interesting to know who creates these policies, and what motivation they have for making them.
With more and more of our cities and facilities being privatised, and more public places being under the control of non-government corporations, we need to have better guidelines as to what sorts of rules can be imposed, and for what reasons. It really is a two way street. If a private corporation allows the general public into their space, they are probably doing it for financial gain. They want people to visit stores and restaurants, and have access to offices and other services within their property. But the flip-side is that they have to give up some control and realize that if a place is made public, anything legal should be allowed. If they want to police the space themselves to help prevent crimes, then they should do that. But they should be prohibited from adding their own arbitrary set of rules which limit the public from doing what is legally and normally acceptable.
While researching the legal aspects of photography for this piece, it became apparent that there are many people concerned about this topic, yet no clear or concise information as to the rights of photographers in public places in Canada. It would be helpful if the government would specifically address this issue so that people would understand their rights and be better equipped to argue with people who try to suppress those rights.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms has several points which may relate to photography in public places:
Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
...
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
...
Search or seizure
8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.
This would lead me to believe that photographers have the right to express themselves and their opinions through the photographic medium. And in the event of a confrontation with someone over their behaviour, it appears that they are protected against search or confiscation of equipment, film, memory cards, and so on.
Despite spending quite some time looking for definite answers, it seems as though the rules are not well defined or understood. However, there seems to be no mention of photography being specifically prohibited or regulated, and most of the court cases dealing with photography and privacy relate to photographs of unconsenting people being used for commercial purposes, not for amateur photography.
So keep taking photographs, and challenge those who try to stop you. If authorities or property owners are worried about photographs being used for criminal purposes, they should be required to prove that this is a real threat. I would argue strongly that it is not, and that people who want to photograph specific spaces for criminal purposes will succeed in doing it regardless of whether there are rules in place or not. In the meantime, the majority of ethical and morally concious citizens should not be made to suffer as a consequence.
