83. Phantom Parrot; movie review

 

PHANTOM PARROT

Cert 12A

89 mins

BBFC advice: Contains references to sexual violence and torture

Where should the lines of police surveillance be drawn and how far should they be allowed to go in terrorism prevention?

Some people say they have nothing to hide, so they would give the police carte blanche to protect the public.

Others would argue that the 2000 Terrorism Act has undermined our human rights because it shifts the emphasis towards the accused having to prove their innocence.

This is undoubtedly the view of Muhammad Rabbani, Director of CAGE, an organisation that fights against discrimination by the authorities.

Rabbani says he has been held at airports several times under the Terrorism Act, which relates specifically to points of entry to the country.

He had always been released without charge until he was apprehended after a flight from Doha and arrested for refusing to submit passwords to his devices.

He is convinced that his interrogation and charge were precipitated by his work with Ali Al-Marri, who claims he was detained and tortured in the United States for suspected terrorism.

Much of the film focuses on The Terrorism Act's Schedule Seven, which says those facing interrogation do not have the right to remain silent and failure to respond is a potential crime. 

Mrs W and I found Kate Stonehill's movie fascinating as far as it went - with its enlightening interviews with Rabbani, Al-Marri and famous human rights lawyer Gareth Peirce.

Non-journalists may also raise an eyebrow at how they schedule a media campaign.

And there is an intriguing section on how important the security services take cyber intelligence training.

However, we felt that we needed more detail - particularly on whether such techniques had nailed terrorists and how many if any, potential attacks on the UK had been thwarted by Schedule Seven.

We also needed more background about the allegations against Al-Marri.

It was as if Pandora's Box had been opened, but we could only peek inside and see a small amount of its content.

Reasons to watch: Fascinating exploration of police powers

Reasons to avoid: One side of the debate

Laughs: None

Jumps: None

Vomit: None

Nudity: None 

Overall rating: 6/10

Did you know? False matches by facial recognition technology have led to more than 65 wrongful interventions by the police in the UK. One was the arrest of an innocent 14-year-old boy in school uniform, who was surrounded by officers and had his fingerprints taken before his eventual release.

The final word.  Kate Stonehill: "It presented a fascinating opportunity to examine the digital age that we're living in, and look at some of the urgent questions we're facing in our society."

Share this post