So, the MP's expenses scandal has finally broken, despite attempts by some members of the House to make themselves exempt from Freedom of Information requests. It appears the banks aren't the only ones with loose morals, as several MP's today appear to have committed acts verging on fraud.
In other news, the Home Affairs select committee met on tuesday about the G20 protests. As you well know at the G20 as well as agreeing action on the credit crunch (and failing to agree much action on climate change) we saw brutal policing and suppression of demonstrators who wanted to voice their opinions legitmately on these issues.
Whilst some MP's at the committee were clearly concerned about heavy handed policing, others - such as David Davis and Keith Vaz - seemed more concerned about traffic disruption than people getting violently attacked... Quite frankly many of them did not appear to have done more than skim read the evidence submitted to the committee. Some were just totally out of touch - one MP even asked whether Chris Abbot, one of the victims of the violence giving evidence, had managed to get the police ID officer of a riot officer who punched him in the face.
As Chris said, its kind of hard to identify someone when your being punched and beaten with batons and shields by riot officers!
You can watch the full video here
http://www.parliamentlive.tv/main/Player.aspx?meetingId=4072
A guardian report summarising it here
www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/13/police-g20-protest
So in summary, we're not happy with the response by politicians yet. We're even less happy with the response by the police. So we'll be back to the MPA on Thursday 28th with more questions - they had better give us decent answers this time!
You can read our questions below. And here are two more upcoming events as you may want to attend.
DEMO
United Campaign Against Police Violence demonstration:
3pm Saturday 23 May UCAPV will march from Trafalgar Square to New Scotland Yard, via Downing Street.
Members Defend Peaceful Protest intend to be at the demo to observe the policing used and to protest about the attack on our democratic right to protest and the fundamental human rights violated.
MET POLICE AUTHORITY PUBLIC MEETING
Thursday 28th May 10am - 12pm at City Hall (betwen london bridge and blackfriars)
If you want to help us keep up the pressure on the police via political channels its really worth coming along to this. As you can see in question three we''re asking what the deal is with the blatant misinformation they included in their last report...
Questions as follows:
1. Why did the police forcibly advance at the South end of the Climate Camp at around 7pm without warning if it was simply a matter of needing a containment to “prevent disorderly protestors from the Bank of England from joining” and, in particular, why did a line of officers use force to advance on the right hand side when there was access from Great Helens.
2. Given the evidence of Poice ID concealment or accidental obscurement of ID at the G20 and subsequent demonstrations, will the Police Uniform review look into placing numbers on the back and front of uniforms and protective gear rather than the shoulder so that Police ID on future demonstrations is more clearly identifiable and less easily removed.
3. Given the evidence submitted to MPA members prior to this meeting about inconsistencies in police statements, how are we as members of the public, and the MPA members, to feel confident in the facts as presented in Metropolitan Police Briefings thus far?
4. Defend Peaceful Protest are aware of five seperate bodies investigating aspects of the G20 protests: The Home Affairs Select Committee, the Joint Committee on Human Rights, the IPCC, Her Majesties Inspectorate of Constabulary and the Metropolitan Police Authority itself. What effort is being made to ensure that all bodies are working together to collate evidence from protestors in order to make an effective inquiry into protesting policing at the G20 as possible.
Monday 18 May 2009
Saturday 18 April 2009
Police taser raids on whitechapel squats show possible use of excessive force yet again
Hi,
Below I release to this blog footage that has not been previously made public, showing a raid on a property in Whitechapel where demonstrators had taken shelter after being mistreated by police for a number of hours at the climate camp.
This raid shows the police use of the taser, a 50,000 volt weapon that if fired incapacitates the victim. Tasers have been condemned by human rights groups for the dangers they pose when fired.
Although in this incident the taser was not fired, it was used to threaten a group of people who were sitting on the floor with their hands in the air. A member of the group was also assaulted by police on entry to the building despite offering no resistance.
The mainstream press would not run this video because they are focusing on Ian Tomlinson and other events and did not feel that it was newsworthy enough because the taser had not been fired.
I feel it is!
It is yet another example of over-reaction and unnecessary force, designed to frighten and intimidate protesters and stop them using their right to protest in the future. It shows yet again the picture of systematic abuse of power by police against protesters that must be stopped.
Please- this is very important! Watch the video and please ensure you post it on every blog, every website and send the link to every person you can think of.
I would also like you to email your MP and London Assembly members, with the footage and voice your concerns over the use of tasers against people who were offering no resistance and clearly peaceful. Make sure you link to the video.
VIDEO RELEASE HERE
**Released by Defend Peaceful Protest on behalf of individuals from climate camp**
http://www.divshare.com/download/7024782-827
Pause video 24 seconds in to see the taser clearly. You can also read the account below and a report on the dangers of tasers.
You can see the build up to the raid here where the individuals try to peacefully negotiate but are ignored by police
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T_MIMlwMzM.
Here is an old 2005 report from Amnesty International which gives some facts & concerns on use of tasers.
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=16652
OUR WEBSITE
http://www.defendpeacefulprotest.org/
We'll be meeting up with a wider campaign against police violence very shortly to see how we can keep up the pressure and work together.
CORROBORATING ACCOUNT
The account from the girl who filmed this is below:
Hi,
My name is xxxx. I am an English Teacher. I would like to present the following as statements to be used in the collection of evidence to highlight the excessive use of force by individual police officers and the MET's tactics as a whole over the demonstrations over the London G20 summit.
On the 1st April 2009 at around 1.00/.30am, I was within the contained climate camp when the police moved to clear the area. I was shocked and disgraced at the forceful approach the police acted upon as they took over the street. There was no prior warning that this was what they had decided to do.
I saw protestors sat down at police lines being hit with batons as the police moved in. This caused the crowds to surge down the street. Consquently what ensued was chaos and panic as people tried to grab belongings. People were being pushed over and trampled upon by both police and fellow protestors due to the speed and force at which the police moved with their shields. These shields were not being used to protect the officer holding them, but more as a weapon to forcefully shove people forward. The police would not allow people to attempt to grab their bags, kitchen equipment and tents, my attempt to do so meant that I was knocked to the floor by the crowd and having to scrabble around as quick as I could to get back up before being trampled. The police were angry and aggressive and I was frightened that if I did not move fast enough that I would be on the receiving end of the baton.
It was only as the crowds surged forward with the push of the police did I hear a police mega phone announcing that the protest was being shut down.
A friend of mine was carrying 3 heavy bags that he had managed to grab (one of them mine as I could not get to it in time and one was a friend who was outside the camp who had not been allowed back in to collect his bag despite it containing his medication) and was struggling with all three. He made a comment to an officer who was pushing him. I was disgusted to see this officer react personally to this comment and hit my friend with the shield that they were carrying. This assault caused my friend to fall to the floor where myself and another friend had to help and pick him up.
All of the above need not have happened had the police allowed people to leave the camp. I was wanting to leave at around 9pm to stay at a friend's house in London as the scenes were begining to get ugly and I was concerned about my safety. Protestors however were told that no-one was allowed in and no-one was allowed out. Consquently I was forced to stay which in turn meant that I was forced to be in the frightening position.
The police followed us out of the camp. As all the tubes were shut and I am new to London and so no nothing of the bus routes to get my friends house, I gratefully went back to Earl Street where we were met with warmth.
The following day, myself and a group of friends were about to leave Earl Street to attend the vigil for Ian Tomlinson. We were keen to leave then due to the mounting police presence in the streets outside but a meeting had been called to agree on whether we should all leave the squat together or whether some would stay to maintain the space.
There was loud banging at the door as the police attempted to break the door down. There was an element of panic as people were unsure of what the group as a collective should do. We all ran upstairs to the 3rd floor and sat down in a circle with our hands in the air and told one another to be calm. Alex was stood up filming.
There was banging and shouting coming from several directions. The police burst in. We were all still sat on the floor with our arms in the air. An officer stood at the front of the room pointing what I thought was a gun at the group. Numerous police were shouting at everyone to "lie face down on the floor", "arms behind our backs" and "no-one move". Terrified I obeyed as I was unsure what the officer was holding. Alex was kneeling down still filming. I saw him being beaten on several occassions and heard his cries of pain. I tried to get a glimpse of what the officer was holding without it being obvious that I had my head up as I was on the outer ring of the group and after seeing Alex being hit for reasons that I did not know, was terrified of the consequences of not obeying. It was then that I realised that it was not shaped like a conventional gun so it must have been a taser.
The police seemed very pysched as the whole scene was very aggressive and completely out of proportion to how we inside Earl were behaving at that time of entering and indeed all morning. As far as I was aware there was no reason for the police to suspect that we would be responding in a manner that reasoned such aggression. I had taken shelter here as there was no way of reaching my friend's house. It was very frightening as I was unsure of exactly what the police would do in those first few minutes, particularly after seeing numerous examples of angry personal police reactions the previous day. Plus, I could still hear Alex moaning in pain.
There was lots of banging in the room next door (I saw after that the police removed the floor of the kitchen). They also smashed a window in the room we were in in an attempt to open a locked door (which had not been used by those contained in the building). And other doors in the surrounding area.
After time, the panic ceased, mainly due to fellow protestors asking for the police to calm and behave accordingly. These voices helped to reassure me that we were in this horrid scene together and would be protected by being in a group (unlike Alex who had been isolated). The police took some people aside (one of them Alex) to question I presume in a neighbouring room. They then started to get people off of the floor, search bodies and bags and then arrest them for violent disorder. In the mean time I could still hear Alex crying out in pain and I was confused as to why the police had seperated him from the group and wondered if he was still being beaten.
The police seemd to be confused as to what approach to do now they had secured the building, this was evident in their muttering amongst themselves after I heard them telling people different things. Some people were being "arrested for violent disorder", others got arrested for "suspicion of violent disorder" and others were "being detained for suspicion of violent disorder".
After a period of about 15/20 minutes, the scene was calm. People were being arrested and searched and the police officer asigned to me was informative and friendly. This however does not detract from the inappropriate initial violence and aggression that the police used to enter the building.
I was forced to hand over my details whilst being filmed despite having done nothing wrong and with no evidence to suggest otherwise. This made me feel like a criminal and was very belittling as we were led out to reporters with cameras in hand cuffs.
Apologies for this being more of a narrative rather than a statement. Please let me know if you wish for me to simplify specfic aspects.
Below I release to this blog footage that has not been previously made public, showing a raid on a property in Whitechapel where demonstrators had taken shelter after being mistreated by police for a number of hours at the climate camp.
This raid shows the police use of the taser, a 50,000 volt weapon that if fired incapacitates the victim. Tasers have been condemned by human rights groups for the dangers they pose when fired.
Although in this incident the taser was not fired, it was used to threaten a group of people who were sitting on the floor with their hands in the air. A member of the group was also assaulted by police on entry to the building despite offering no resistance.
The mainstream press would not run this video because they are focusing on Ian Tomlinson and other events and did not feel that it was newsworthy enough because the taser had not been fired.
I feel it is!
It is yet another example of over-reaction and unnecessary force, designed to frighten and intimidate protesters and stop them using their right to protest in the future. It shows yet again the picture of systematic abuse of power by police against protesters that must be stopped.
Please- this is very important! Watch the video and please ensure you post it on every blog, every website and send the link to every person you can think of.
I would also like you to email your MP and London Assembly members, with the footage and voice your concerns over the use of tasers against people who were offering no resistance and clearly peaceful. Make sure you link to the video.
VIDEO RELEASE HERE
**Released by Defend Peaceful Protest on behalf of individuals from climate camp**
http://www.divshare.com/download/7024782-827
Pause video 24 seconds in to see the taser clearly. You can also read the account below and a report on the dangers of tasers.
You can see the build up to the raid here where the individuals try to peacefully negotiate but are ignored by police
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7T_MIMlwMzM.
Here is an old 2005 report from Amnesty International which gives some facts & concerns on use of tasers.
http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=16652
OUR WEBSITE
http://www.defendpeacefulprotest.org/
We'll be meeting up with a wider campaign against police violence very shortly to see how we can keep up the pressure and work together.
CORROBORATING ACCOUNT
The account from the girl who filmed this is below:
Hi,
My name is xxxx. I am an English Teacher. I would like to present the following as statements to be used in the collection of evidence to highlight the excessive use of force by individual police officers and the MET's tactics as a whole over the demonstrations over the London G20 summit.
On the 1st April 2009 at around 1.00/.30am, I was within the contained climate camp when the police moved to clear the area. I was shocked and disgraced at the forceful approach the police acted upon as they took over the street. There was no prior warning that this was what they had decided to do.
I saw protestors sat down at police lines being hit with batons as the police moved in. This caused the crowds to surge down the street. Consquently what ensued was chaos and panic as people tried to grab belongings. People were being pushed over and trampled upon by both police and fellow protestors due to the speed and force at which the police moved with their shields. These shields were not being used to protect the officer holding them, but more as a weapon to forcefully shove people forward. The police would not allow people to attempt to grab their bags, kitchen equipment and tents, my attempt to do so meant that I was knocked to the floor by the crowd and having to scrabble around as quick as I could to get back up before being trampled. The police were angry and aggressive and I was frightened that if I did not move fast enough that I would be on the receiving end of the baton.
It was only as the crowds surged forward with the push of the police did I hear a police mega phone announcing that the protest was being shut down.
A friend of mine was carrying 3 heavy bags that he had managed to grab (one of them mine as I could not get to it in time and one was a friend who was outside the camp who had not been allowed back in to collect his bag despite it containing his medication) and was struggling with all three. He made a comment to an officer who was pushing him. I was disgusted to see this officer react personally to this comment and hit my friend with the shield that they were carrying. This assault caused my friend to fall to the floor where myself and another friend had to help and pick him up.
All of the above need not have happened had the police allowed people to leave the camp. I was wanting to leave at around 9pm to stay at a friend's house in London as the scenes were begining to get ugly and I was concerned about my safety. Protestors however were told that no-one was allowed in and no-one was allowed out. Consquently I was forced to stay which in turn meant that I was forced to be in the frightening position.
The police followed us out of the camp. As all the tubes were shut and I am new to London and so no nothing of the bus routes to get my friends house, I gratefully went back to Earl Street where we were met with warmth.
The following day, myself and a group of friends were about to leave Earl Street to attend the vigil for Ian Tomlinson. We were keen to leave then due to the mounting police presence in the streets outside but a meeting had been called to agree on whether we should all leave the squat together or whether some would stay to maintain the space.
There was loud banging at the door as the police attempted to break the door down. There was an element of panic as people were unsure of what the group as a collective should do. We all ran upstairs to the 3rd floor and sat down in a circle with our hands in the air and told one another to be calm. Alex was stood up filming.
There was banging and shouting coming from several directions. The police burst in. We were all still sat on the floor with our arms in the air. An officer stood at the front of the room pointing what I thought was a gun at the group. Numerous police were shouting at everyone to "lie face down on the floor", "arms behind our backs" and "no-one move". Terrified I obeyed as I was unsure what the officer was holding. Alex was kneeling down still filming. I saw him being beaten on several occassions and heard his cries of pain. I tried to get a glimpse of what the officer was holding without it being obvious that I had my head up as I was on the outer ring of the group and after seeing Alex being hit for reasons that I did not know, was terrified of the consequences of not obeying. It was then that I realised that it was not shaped like a conventional gun so it must have been a taser.
The police seemed very pysched as the whole scene was very aggressive and completely out of proportion to how we inside Earl were behaving at that time of entering and indeed all morning. As far as I was aware there was no reason for the police to suspect that we would be responding in a manner that reasoned such aggression. I had taken shelter here as there was no way of reaching my friend's house. It was very frightening as I was unsure of exactly what the police would do in those first few minutes, particularly after seeing numerous examples of angry personal police reactions the previous day. Plus, I could still hear Alex moaning in pain.
There was lots of banging in the room next door (I saw after that the police removed the floor of the kitchen). They also smashed a window in the room we were in in an attempt to open a locked door (which had not been used by those contained in the building). And other doors in the surrounding area.
After time, the panic ceased, mainly due to fellow protestors asking for the police to calm and behave accordingly. These voices helped to reassure me that we were in this horrid scene together and would be protected by being in a group (unlike Alex who had been isolated). The police took some people aside (one of them Alex) to question I presume in a neighbouring room. They then started to get people off of the floor, search bodies and bags and then arrest them for violent disorder. In the mean time I could still hear Alex crying out in pain and I was confused as to why the police had seperated him from the group and wondered if he was still being beaten.
The police seemd to be confused as to what approach to do now they had secured the building, this was evident in their muttering amongst themselves after I heard them telling people different things. Some people were being "arrested for violent disorder", others got arrested for "suspicion of violent disorder" and others were "being detained for suspicion of violent disorder".
After a period of about 15/20 minutes, the scene was calm. People were being arrested and searched and the police officer asigned to me was informative and friendly. This however does not detract from the inappropriate initial violence and aggression that the police used to enter the building.
I was forced to hand over my details whilst being filmed despite having done nothing wrong and with no evidence to suggest otherwise. This made me feel like a criminal and was very belittling as we were led out to reporters with cameras in hand cuffs.
Apologies for this being more of a narrative rather than a statement. Please let me know if you wish for me to simplify specfic aspects.
Saturday 11 April 2009
Website up!
WEBSITE UP!
www.defendpeacefulprotest.org
Great work from our two volunteer web designers who got a site up in under 24 hours! You can see some actions to take and we will be putting up more content as time goes on. Its early days yet so we dont have our own domain but this is only the beginning!
At the moment we are a loose collection of volunteers from all walks of life who have been united by the shocking use of violence displayed at the G20 protests. If you feel the same and want to change our policing for the better, email us!
no2policeviolence@googlemail.com
www.defendpeacefulprotest.org
Great work from our two volunteer web designers who got a site up in under 24 hours! You can see some actions to take and we will be putting up more content as time goes on. Its early days yet so we dont have our own domain but this is only the beginning!
At the moment we are a loose collection of volunteers from all walks of life who have been united by the shocking use of violence displayed at the G20 protests. If you feel the same and want to change our policing for the better, email us!
no2policeviolence@googlemail.com
Friday 10 April 2009
Update on campaign
Hi all,
Meeting at 11am outside Bethnal Green tube, so the plan is as follows
- Distributing flyers
- Spreading the word and meeting like minded concerned people
- Monitoring the police behaviour and encouraging people to demonstrate in a non- violent manner and avoid confontation - which would be counter-productive
- Providing a basic information pack on the objectives of the group and briefing media, political groups and other pressure groups who are interested in affliliating or undertaking their own activities and support our goals
On the subject of our goals and who we are:
We are a grassroots movement of ordinary people, with views across the political spectrum who are united by one common purpose - to protest our rights and fundamental freedom.
We want to be able to express our concerns and the medium of protest when constructively done is a legitimate way for people to air their greivances. It should not be suppressed in the way it was last week in a parliamentary democracy.
OUR AIMS
- LONG TERM REFORM – Reform of police tactics deployed and the overall management of the G20 operation. New guidelines based on police role to support and facilitate peaceful protest.
- JUSTICE - Independent investigation of all alleged assaults by individual police officers.
- INVESTIGATE IAN’S DEATH - Criminal investigation into the death of bystander Ian Tomlinson and his assault by police officers on Wednesday 1st April 2009.
- KETTLING BANNED - A ban on the use of the kettling technique against non-violent protestors. Legal recognition that used against peaceful protestors, this violates article 5 and 13 of the human rights act.
Your civil liberties are under attack, stand up for them!
Meeting at 11am outside Bethnal Green tube, so the plan is as follows
- Distributing flyers
- Spreading the word and meeting like minded concerned people
- Monitoring the police behaviour and encouraging people to demonstrate in a non- violent manner and avoid confontation - which would be counter-productive
- Providing a basic information pack on the objectives of the group and briefing media, political groups and other pressure groups who are interested in affliliating or undertaking their own activities and support our goals
On the subject of our goals and who we are:
We are a grassroots movement of ordinary people, with views across the political spectrum who are united by one common purpose - to protest our rights and fundamental freedom.
We want to be able to express our concerns and the medium of protest when constructively done is a legitimate way for people to air their greivances. It should not be suppressed in the way it was last week in a parliamentary democracy.
OUR AIMS
- LONG TERM REFORM – Reform of police tactics deployed and the overall management of the G20 operation. New guidelines based on police role to support and facilitate peaceful protest.
- JUSTICE - Independent investigation of all alleged assaults by individual police officers.
- INVESTIGATE IAN’S DEATH - Criminal investigation into the death of bystander Ian Tomlinson and his assault by police officers on Wednesday 1st April 2009.
- KETTLING BANNED - A ban on the use of the kettling technique against non-violent protestors. Legal recognition that used against peaceful protestors, this violates article 5 and 13 of the human rights act.
Your civil liberties are under attack, stand up for them!
Legal ruling and opinion on kettling from an expert
Here i've posted from a source I contacted about G20's who was able to offer me an opinion on the police tactics and in particular the police approach of 'kettling'.
To add my laymans opinion:
For those that are unfamiliar with the term, Kettling is throwing up a police cordon and not allowing anyone within an arbitarily defined legal area to leave. In the recent G20 protests this was used against peaceful demonstrations, which did not have a reasonable chance of violence apparent to me or the many other impartial observers who have talked about it elsewhere.
Whats more, the 'Kettling' of protestors was exacerbated by the use of riot police and deliberate squeezing of the space available to protestors after the police cordon had been created. There were also acts of violence by the police, batoning and hitting with the fronts and sharp edges of shields in order to squeeze in the kettle. How can this be termed disproportionate force against peaceful protest?
The legal researcher I contacted (must remain anonymous) explained the following:
LEGAL OPINION
On the question whether the police tactics, and in particular the use of kettling, are legal - as you rightly say it is a question that has come up before, and reached the House of Lords in the case of Austin, which was decided earlier this year, and - again, as you say - is now going to Strasbourg. We have not done any susbtantive analysis of the issues raised in that case to see what we would think about them, or whether we would agree with the decision of the Lords. But in case it's of interest to you...
...I would also think that, even on the standard established in this judgment, there would be some ground for asking whether the use of kettling this week was, as Lord Hope said it had to be, "resorted to in good faith, [...] proportionate and [...] enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary" - no doubt that will be an argument advanced by lawyers taking forward complaints from yesterday. Also worth noting the last paragraph that I pasted below - from Lord Neuberger's speech - again, I would think there is a good case to be made for saying that the cordon here was being used to punish the protestors rather than for legitimate public safety reasons.
judgment handed down today from the house of lords on Art 5 right to liberty & the actions of the police in creating cordons in public demonstrations & holding demonstrators within those cordons.
this relates to the May Day protests in oxford circus back in 2001. the situation is not exactly comparable to the Climate camp demonstrations, because the protestors in the May Day case had not given the police prior warning of the demonstration, or co-operated with the police in any way
RULING AS FOLLOWS
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldjudgmt/jd090128/austin-1.htm
Lord Hope: "There is no suggestion that she herself [the appellant who brought the case] was involved in any violent acts or that she had any other intention than to engage in peaceful protest. Nevertheless she willingly took the risk of violence on the part of other demonstrators with whom she chose to be present, and her own conduct was unreasonable in joining with others to obstruct the highway."
"Any steps that are taken must be resorted to in good faith and must be proportionate to the situation which has made the measures necessary. This is essential to preserve the fundamental principle that anything that is done which affects a person’s right to liberty must not be arbitrary. If these requirements are met however it will be proper to conclude that measures of crowd control that are undertaken in the interests of the community will not infringe the article 5 rights of individual members of the crowd whose freedom of movement is restricted by them."
"In my opinion measures of crowd control will fall outside the area of [Art 5's] application, so long as they are not arbitrary. This means that they must be resorted to in good faith, that they must be proportionate and that they are enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary."
Lord Scott: "The imposition by the police of the Oxford Circus cordon on the appellant, and many others, was done for the purposes of protecting the physical safety of the demonstrators, including the appellant, and of protecting the neighbourhood properties from the violence that it was justifiably feared some of the demonstrators would perpetrate, violence that the appellant herself regarded as likely to happen. The intention of the police was to maintain the cordon only so long as was reasonably thought necessary to achieve those purposes and it is accepted by the appellant that the cordon was not maintained longer than was necessary to achieve those purposes. In the circumstances the confinement and restriction of movement that the cordon inevitably imposed on those within it did not, in my opinion, constitute an Article 5 deprivation of their liberty."
"I conclude that it is essential, in the present case, to pose the simple question: what were the police doing at Oxford Circus on 1 May 2001? What were they about? The answer is, as Lord Hope has explained in his full summary of the judge’s unchallenged findings, that they were engaged in an unusually difficult exercise in crowd control, in order to avoid personal injuries and damage to property. The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in Red Lion Square on 15 June 1974 [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lion_Square_disorders]. The aim of the police was to disperse the crowd, and the fact that the achievement of that aim took much longer than they expected was due to circumstances beyond their control."
Lord Neuberger: "where, as happened to the appellant in this case, a person is confined in an area against her will by the police for well over six hours, in circumstances where paras (b) and (c) do not apply, the notion that there has been no infringement of article 5 seems, at least on the face of it, surprising. All the more so, given that the appellant was required to remain, in circumstances of some discomfort, in an area of some 2,000 square metres, cordoned in together with apparently some 3,000 other people, and where the confinement was in the context of the appellant exercising her undoubted right to demonstrate."
But... "The police are under a duty to keep the peace when a riot is threatened, and to take reasonable steps to prevent serious public disorder, especially if it involves violence to individuals and property. Any sensible person living in a modern democracy would reasonably expect to be confined, or at least accept that it was proper that she could be confined, within a limited space by the police, in some circumstances. Thus, if a deranged or drunk person was on the loose with a gun in a building, the police would be entitled, indeed expected, to ensure that, possibly for many hours, members of the public were confined to where they were, even if it was in a pretty small room with a number of other people. Equally, where there are groups of supporters of opposing teams at a football match, the police routinely, and obviously properly, ensure that, in order to avoid violence and mayhem, the two groups are kept apart; this often involves confining one or both of the groups within a relatively small space for a not insignificant period. Or if there is an accident on a motorway, it is common, and again proper, for the police to require drivers and passengers to remain in their stationary motor vehicles, often for more than an hour or two. In all such cases, the police would be confining individuals for their own protection and to prevent violence to people or property.
So, too, as I see it, where there is a demonstration, particularly one attended by a justified expectation of substantial disorder and violence, the police must be expected, indeed sometimes required, to take steps to ensure that such disorder and violence do not occur, or, at least, are confined to a minimum. Such steps must often involve restraining the movement of the demonstrators, and sometimes of those members of the public unintentionally caught up in the demonstration. In some instances, that must involve people being confined to a relatively small space for some time.
In such cases, it seems to me unrealistic to contend that article 5 can come into play at all, provided, and it is a very important proviso, that the actions of the police are proportionate and reasonable, and any confinement is restricted to a reasonable minimum, as to discomfort and as to time, as is necessary for the relevant purpose, namely the prevention of serious public disorder and violence. "
"anyone on the streets, particularly on a demonstration with a well-known risk of serious violence, must be taken to be consenting to the possibility of being confined by the police, if it is a reasonable and proportionate way of preventing serious public disorder and violence"
Ends
- The key bit here from the researcher on the application of this ruling to recent protests:
If it transpired, for instance, that the police had maintained the cordon, beyond the time necessary for crowd control, in order to punish, or “to teach a lesson” to, the demonstrators within the cordon, then it seems to me that very different considerations would arise. In such circumstances, I would have thought that there would have been a powerful argument for saying that the maintenance of the cordon did amount to a detention within the meaning of article 5."
To add my laymans opinion:
For those that are unfamiliar with the term, Kettling is throwing up a police cordon and not allowing anyone within an arbitarily defined legal area to leave. In the recent G20 protests this was used against peaceful demonstrations, which did not have a reasonable chance of violence apparent to me or the many other impartial observers who have talked about it elsewhere.
Whats more, the 'Kettling' of protestors was exacerbated by the use of riot police and deliberate squeezing of the space available to protestors after the police cordon had been created. There were also acts of violence by the police, batoning and hitting with the fronts and sharp edges of shields in order to squeeze in the kettle. How can this be termed disproportionate force against peaceful protest?
The legal researcher I contacted (must remain anonymous) explained the following:
LEGAL OPINION
On the question whether the police tactics, and in particular the use of kettling, are legal - as you rightly say it is a question that has come up before, and reached the House of Lords in the case of Austin, which was decided earlier this year, and - again, as you say - is now going to Strasbourg. We have not done any susbtantive analysis of the issues raised in that case to see what we would think about them, or whether we would agree with the decision of the Lords. But in case it's of interest to you...
...I would also think that, even on the standard established in this judgment, there would be some ground for asking whether the use of kettling this week was, as Lord Hope said it had to be, "resorted to in good faith, [...] proportionate and [...] enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary" - no doubt that will be an argument advanced by lawyers taking forward complaints from yesterday. Also worth noting the last paragraph that I pasted below - from Lord Neuberger's speech - again, I would think there is a good case to be made for saying that the cordon here was being used to punish the protestors rather than for legitimate public safety reasons.
judgment handed down today from the house of lords on Art 5 right to liberty & the actions of the police in creating cordons in public demonstrations & holding demonstrators within those cordons.
this relates to the May Day protests in oxford circus back in 2001. the situation is not exactly comparable to the Climate camp demonstrations, because the protestors in the May Day case had not given the police prior warning of the demonstration, or co-operated with the police in any way
RULING AS FOLLOWS
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200809/ldjudgmt/jd090128/austin-1.htm
Lord Hope: "There is no suggestion that she herself [the appellant who brought the case] was involved in any violent acts or that she had any other intention than to engage in peaceful protest. Nevertheless she willingly took the risk of violence on the part of other demonstrators with whom she chose to be present, and her own conduct was unreasonable in joining with others to obstruct the highway."
"Any steps that are taken must be resorted to in good faith and must be proportionate to the situation which has made the measures necessary. This is essential to preserve the fundamental principle that anything that is done which affects a person’s right to liberty must not be arbitrary. If these requirements are met however it will be proper to conclude that measures of crowd control that are undertaken in the interests of the community will not infringe the article 5 rights of individual members of the crowd whose freedom of movement is restricted by them."
"In my opinion measures of crowd control will fall outside the area of [Art 5's] application, so long as they are not arbitrary. This means that they must be resorted to in good faith, that they must be proportionate and that they are enforced for no longer than is reasonably necessary."
Lord Scott: "The imposition by the police of the Oxford Circus cordon on the appellant, and many others, was done for the purposes of protecting the physical safety of the demonstrators, including the appellant, and of protecting the neighbourhood properties from the violence that it was justifiably feared some of the demonstrators would perpetrate, violence that the appellant herself regarded as likely to happen. The intention of the police was to maintain the cordon only so long as was reasonably thought necessary to achieve those purposes and it is accepted by the appellant that the cordon was not maintained longer than was necessary to achieve those purposes. In the circumstances the confinement and restriction of movement that the cordon inevitably imposed on those within it did not, in my opinion, constitute an Article 5 deprivation of their liberty."
"I conclude that it is essential, in the present case, to pose the simple question: what were the police doing at Oxford Circus on 1 May 2001? What were they about? The answer is, as Lord Hope has explained in his full summary of the judge’s unchallenged findings, that they were engaged in an unusually difficult exercise in crowd control, in order to avoid personal injuries and damage to property. The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in Red Lion Square on 15 June 1974 [see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Lion_Square_disorders]. The aim of the police was to disperse the crowd, and the fact that the achievement of that aim took much longer than they expected was due to circumstances beyond their control."
Lord Neuberger: "where, as happened to the appellant in this case, a person is confined in an area against her will by the police for well over six hours, in circumstances where paras (b) and (c) do not apply, the notion that there has been no infringement of article 5 seems, at least on the face of it, surprising. All the more so, given that the appellant was required to remain, in circumstances of some discomfort, in an area of some 2,000 square metres, cordoned in together with apparently some 3,000 other people, and where the confinement was in the context of the appellant exercising her undoubted right to demonstrate."
But... "The police are under a duty to keep the peace when a riot is threatened, and to take reasonable steps to prevent serious public disorder, especially if it involves violence to individuals and property. Any sensible person living in a modern democracy would reasonably expect to be confined, or at least accept that it was proper that she could be confined, within a limited space by the police, in some circumstances. Thus, if a deranged or drunk person was on the loose with a gun in a building, the police would be entitled, indeed expected, to ensure that, possibly for many hours, members of the public were confined to where they were, even if it was in a pretty small room with a number of other people. Equally, where there are groups of supporters of opposing teams at a football match, the police routinely, and obviously properly, ensure that, in order to avoid violence and mayhem, the two groups are kept apart; this often involves confining one or both of the groups within a relatively small space for a not insignificant period. Or if there is an accident on a motorway, it is common, and again proper, for the police to require drivers and passengers to remain in their stationary motor vehicles, often for more than an hour or two. In all such cases, the police would be confining individuals for their own protection and to prevent violence to people or property.
So, too, as I see it, where there is a demonstration, particularly one attended by a justified expectation of substantial disorder and violence, the police must be expected, indeed sometimes required, to take steps to ensure that such disorder and violence do not occur, or, at least, are confined to a minimum. Such steps must often involve restraining the movement of the demonstrators, and sometimes of those members of the public unintentionally caught up in the demonstration. In some instances, that must involve people being confined to a relatively small space for some time.
In such cases, it seems to me unrealistic to contend that article 5 can come into play at all, provided, and it is a very important proviso, that the actions of the police are proportionate and reasonable, and any confinement is restricted to a reasonable minimum, as to discomfort and as to time, as is necessary for the relevant purpose, namely the prevention of serious public disorder and violence. "
"anyone on the streets, particularly on a demonstration with a well-known risk of serious violence, must be taken to be consenting to the possibility of being confined by the police, if it is a reasonable and proportionate way of preventing serious public disorder and violence"
Ends
- The key bit here from the researcher on the application of this ruling to recent protests:
If it transpired, for instance, that the police had maintained the cordon, beyond the time necessary for crowd control, in order to punish, or “to teach a lesson” to, the demonstrators within the cordon, then it seems to me that very different considerations would arise. In such circumstances, I would have thought that there would have been a powerful argument for saying that the maintenance of the cordon did amount to a detention within the meaning of article 5."
Ian tomlinson officer still not questioned by IPCC, is this good enough?
Hi all,
A very quick update here but you should really read this article if you have time and think about the hypocrisy of it.
It seems to be one rule for the general public, who would face immediate arrest if admitting to an assault of this kind, another for the police officer who may have caused the death of an innocent man.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/10/g20-assault-investigation
The death of Ian Tomlinson and importantly the police tactics as a whole need to be investigated IMMEDIATELY. Some things can't wait for the easter holidays!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will be assembling at Bethnal Green tube to hand out flyers informing the public about the campaign at 11am. I have been informed another group is protesting at 11.30am at Bethnal Green police station. Provided they advocate non-violence, I personally respect their right to express their disgust at the way the G20 protests were handled and at the death of an innocent man.
As a group of concerned citizens, group members of Protest for Police intimidation will calling for:
LONG TERM REFORM
This is not a campaign about one man, or one protest. We want police tactics and the overall management of future operations reviewed and reformed. New guidelines, respecting protestors fundamental human rights and based on the police role to support and facilitate peaceful protest must be installed.
INESTIGATE IAN'S DEATH
The IPPC should immediately carry forward its investigation into Ian Tomlinsons death.
KETTLING BANNED
A ban on the use of 'Kettling' a technique which arbitarily restricts freedom of movement and degrades protestors. This tactic inflames protestors and does more to incite violence than stop it. It should be banned from use against peaceful protestors
JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
There were many other assaults and disproprotionate use of force was the norm across the G20 protests. Individual complaints against officers should be investigated and punishment upheld
BUT REMEMBER...
The Police still have a job to do - fighting crime on our behalf. As a group of human beings they should not be vilified for the acts of their commanding offers, political masters and aggressive individual officers. Despite the horror stories not all police officers are guilty of violence and treating them all as 'the enemy' is counter productive and will not acheive any of the aims which will benefit all of us.
If you really care about changing our system to protect your rights, I hope you will remember to rise above violence and abuse.
Please keep an eye on the blog, we will be launching a full website over the weekend.
http://planethackney.blogspot.com/
Ways to take action are summarised there from previous messages.
------------------------------------------------------------------
ONE EASY ACTION FOR YOU!
If you've not done anything yet, just to make you feel suitable guilty its 1.40 am and I'm writing this having come back from the pub ;-) thats right I do have a life outside of this group! I hope you feel suitably guilty (joking)
As I've said before, you can make my life a lot easier by inviting your friends! (click link just below picture at top right of group) so I don't have to spend ages posting the links to people to raise awareness!
Make sure you send them a quick message to explain what your sending.
A very quick update here but you should really read this article if you have time and think about the hypocrisy of it.
It seems to be one rule for the general public, who would face immediate arrest if admitting to an assault of this kind, another for the police officer who may have caused the death of an innocent man.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/10/g20-assault-investigation
The death of Ian Tomlinson and importantly the police tactics as a whole need to be investigated IMMEDIATELY. Some things can't wait for the easter holidays!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
We will be assembling at Bethnal Green tube to hand out flyers informing the public about the campaign at 11am. I have been informed another group is protesting at 11.30am at Bethnal Green police station. Provided they advocate non-violence, I personally respect their right to express their disgust at the way the G20 protests were handled and at the death of an innocent man.
As a group of concerned citizens, group members of Protest for Police intimidation will calling for:
LONG TERM REFORM
This is not a campaign about one man, or one protest. We want police tactics and the overall management of future operations reviewed and reformed. New guidelines, respecting protestors fundamental human rights and based on the police role to support and facilitate peaceful protest must be installed.
INESTIGATE IAN'S DEATH
The IPPC should immediately carry forward its investigation into Ian Tomlinsons death.
KETTLING BANNED
A ban on the use of 'Kettling' a technique which arbitarily restricts freedom of movement and degrades protestors. This tactic inflames protestors and does more to incite violence than stop it. It should be banned from use against peaceful protestors
JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
There were many other assaults and disproprotionate use of force was the norm across the G20 protests. Individual complaints against officers should be investigated and punishment upheld
BUT REMEMBER...
The Police still have a job to do - fighting crime on our behalf. As a group of human beings they should not be vilified for the acts of their commanding offers, political masters and aggressive individual officers. Despite the horror stories not all police officers are guilty of violence and treating them all as 'the enemy' is counter productive and will not acheive any of the aims which will benefit all of us.
If you really care about changing our system to protect your rights, I hope you will remember to rise above violence and abuse.
Please keep an eye on the blog, we will be launching a full website over the weekend.
http://planethackney.blogspot.com/
Ways to take action are summarised there from previous messages.
------------------------------------------------------------------
ONE EASY ACTION FOR YOU!
If you've not done anything yet, just to make you feel suitable guilty its 1.40 am and I'm writing this having come back from the pub ;-) thats right I do have a life outside of this group! I hope you feel suitably guilty (joking)
As I've said before, you can make my life a lot easier by inviting your friends! (click link just below picture at top right of group) so I don't have to spend ages posting the links to people to raise awareness!
Make sure you send them a quick message to explain what your sending.
Wednesday 8 April 2009
another update on Police violence, campaign grows!
Hi all, thanks for staying with the group and respect to all those who are doing their own individual work on this issue. Update on news and actions you can take below. As I write this the group passed 1000 members. More importantly, the police officer shown here hitting Ian Tomlinson has come forward
NEWS
IPCC CAVES TO PRESSURE AND TAKES ON INVESTIGATION
David Howarth, an MP and barrister assisting some of the protestors assaulted at the G20 demonstrations has called for a criminal investigation and removal of the city police from the investigation due to their involvement in the organisation of the G20 demonstrations and likely bias. The IPCC today removed them from the investigation and will be conducting a full independent investigation.
OFFICER INVOLVED IN TOMLINSONS DEATH COMES FORWARD
No news yet on his identity (likely to be concealed I would imagine whilst investigations go on)
TAKE ACTION – 8th April
WRITE TO YOUR MP OVER IAN’S DEATH!
http://steflewandowski.com/2009/04/a-letter-to-my-mp-about-ian-tomlinson/
A standard letter you could use as the basis to write to your MP about Ian Tomlinson. If you were at the demo and have your own accounts here that will really add weight but you could also add weight to this groups objective of stopping all disproportionate violence as follows.
You could write about your disgust for such tactics, cite article 5 of the human rights act and article 13, which relate to right to protection from cruel and degrading treatment and rights freedom of movement.
You could mention the ‘systematic abuse of power by the Metropolitan police at the G20 demos’ and ‘A disproportionate and dangerous use of force on numerous occasions, leading to the tragic death of an innocent man’
DEMONSTRATE AND SPREAD THE WORD!
There is a rally in in solidarity with Ian Tomlinson at 11.30am on Saturday starting at Bethnal green police station. It is not associated directly with this group but I believe the organisers hope to keep it non-violent. Protest against police intimidation will be calling for justice and an end to the deployment of over-excessive force and the tactics of 'kettling' protesters in.
Volunteers from this group will be joining the demo to distribute leaflets and help spread the word to the general public about the campaign.
SIGN THE PETITION REMINDER
A reminder to sign this to petition the Prime Minister to disallow the use of kettles, batons and other aggressive police tactics at entirely peaceful protests:http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/climatecampg20/
CAMPAIGN DEVELOPMENT
'We are not the only group working on this topic but we are in the process of instigating the following
- We are aiming to launch a website in the next couple of days
- We are building a campaigns team and activist base
- We are building links with Journalists and sympathetic parliamentarians, MEPs and LGA members. If you work for one of these individuals please PM me.
- If you are interested in helping in any way at all pm me or email me on no2policeviolence@googlemail.co.uk Please list any marketing, campaigns, activism, art/design or any other skills you can employ.
NEWS
IPCC CAVES TO PRESSURE AND TAKES ON INVESTIGATION
David Howarth, an MP and barrister assisting some of the protestors assaulted at the G20 demonstrations has called for a criminal investigation and removal of the city police from the investigation due to their involvement in the organisation of the G20 demonstrations and likely bias. The IPCC today removed them from the investigation and will be conducting a full independent investigation.
OFFICER INVOLVED IN TOMLINSONS DEATH COMES FORWARD
No news yet on his identity (likely to be concealed I would imagine whilst investigations go on)
TAKE ACTION – 8th April
WRITE TO YOUR MP OVER IAN’S DEATH!
http://steflewandowski.com/2009/04/a-letter-to-my-mp-about-ian-tomlinson/
A standard letter you could use as the basis to write to your MP about Ian Tomlinson. If you were at the demo and have your own accounts here that will really add weight but you could also add weight to this groups objective of stopping all disproportionate violence as follows.
You could write about your disgust for such tactics, cite article 5 of the human rights act and article 13, which relate to right to protection from cruel and degrading treatment and rights freedom of movement.
You could mention the ‘systematic abuse of power by the Metropolitan police at the G20 demos’ and ‘A disproportionate and dangerous use of force on numerous occasions, leading to the tragic death of an innocent man’
DEMONSTRATE AND SPREAD THE WORD!
There is a rally in in solidarity with Ian Tomlinson at 11.30am on Saturday starting at Bethnal green police station. It is not associated directly with this group but I believe the organisers hope to keep it non-violent. Protest against police intimidation will be calling for justice and an end to the deployment of over-excessive force and the tactics of 'kettling' protesters in.
Volunteers from this group will be joining the demo to distribute leaflets and help spread the word to the general public about the campaign.
SIGN THE PETITION REMINDER
A reminder to sign this to petition the Prime Minister to disallow the use of kettles, batons and other aggressive police tactics at entirely peaceful protests:http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/climatecampg20/
CAMPAIGN DEVELOPMENT
'We are not the only group working on this topic but we are in the process of instigating the following
- We are aiming to launch a website in the next couple of days
- We are building a campaigns team and activist base
- We are building links with Journalists and sympathetic parliamentarians, MEPs and LGA members. If you work for one of these individuals please PM me.
- If you are interested in helping in any way at all pm me or email me on no2policeviolence@googlemail.co.uk Please list any marketing, campaigns, activism, art/design or any other skills you can employ.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
