Death threat reporter's plea for security refused

This story was reported in last Sunday's Observer. It is a shame to see that the UK government fails to recognise that journalists are under threat as much as civil servants - particularly in the wake of Anna Polotkovskaya's recent murder in Moscow. And it's not as if Nortern Irish paramilitary groups are known for their kindness or their general sloppiness in pursuing people who are on their hitlist...

I'll quote a bit from the story to give you the gist of things:

Henry McDonald, Ireland editor
Sunday November 12, 2006

Observer

Human rights organisations have accused the British government of being as indifferent as the Kremlin to death threats against journalists from terrorists and criminals.

Index on Censorship and Article 19 - two groups that defend freedom of speech around the world - have criticised the decision to deny a colleague of the murdered Northern Ireland reporter Martin O'Hagan admission to the Key Persons Protection Scheme.

Paul Goggins, the Northern Ireland Office Security Minister, has written to the Sunday World journalist, who has received his third death threat in four years. The latest is understood to come from republican dissidents.

The minister's letter says the reporter is not entitled to government support to fortify his home. This normally includes putting in bulletproof windows, hidden CCTV cameras and panic buttons linked to the nearest police station. Instead the minister suggests that the Belfast-based reporter move home.

In his correspondence, Goggins admits that the journalist, whose identity The Observer is not revealing for fear of further threats to his life, is in danger. 'The Chief Constable has indicated that the threat pertaining to your is "Substantial - Level 3",' he writes.

However, he continues: 'In this context I must balance the application against the other criteria... You are not employed in one of the occupations normally covered by the Scheme, and therefore have failed to meet the requirements of this criterion. I have also concluded that you are not occupying a wider public role which is contributing to the objectives of the scheme.'

Click here for the rest.

I can only hope that the journalist will be able to overturn this decision on judicial review. All told, it doesn't bode well for other journalists who find themselves in the same situation, or for the British government's general awareness of the important role journalists play in a dmeocratic society...