Groot-Brittannië: Het controleren van klimaatkamp een belangrijke aanval op democratische rechten
Door Paul Bond | Een kamp van een week van het klimaatprotest in Noord-Kent heeft, in het midden van wijdverspreide eisen van het onevenredige en agressieve controleren gebeëindigd. Rond 100 mensen werden gearresteerd over cursus van het protest, 46 van wie, meestal met obstakelinbreuken zijn belast. Multimillion-pond het controleren van het kamp merkte een significante aanval op democratische rechten en burgerlijke vrijheden.
Het kamp werd gehouden om de bouw van een nieuwe met kolen gestookte krachtcentrale in Kingsnorth te protesteren, op het estuarium Medway. Het bedrijf E.ON het UK van de energie stelt voor vervangend de bestaande steenkoolkrachtcentrale met nieuwe. Dit zou de eerste nieuwe steenkoolkrachtcentrale zijn die in Groot-Brittannië in meer dan 30 jaar wordt gebouwd. Het voorstel heeft nog om door John Hutton worden goedgekeurd, van wie portefeuille als Staatssecretaris voor zaken, onderneming en regelgevende hervorming de kwesties van de energieveiligheid omvat. Het voorstel is overgegaan tot het bureau van Hutton na zijn overeenkomst door het plaatselijk gezag, de Raad Medway.
Kingsnorth is eerste van verscheidene nieuwe met kolen gestookte krachtcentrales die voor plaatsen over het UK worden voorgesteld. De overheid heeft tot deze posten een zeer belangrijke factor in het verzekeren van energievoorziening gemaakt. Protestors debatteert dat de steenkoolkrachtcentrales, met hun hoge emissies van Co2, de meest verontreinigende middelen zijn om elektriciteit te veroorzaken. Tussen 1.000 en 2.000 protestors kwam aan het kamp in de loop van de week bij de ontwikkeling van Kingsnorth te protesteren. Ongeacht hun directe protestactiviteiten, voerde het kamp ook workshop en besprekingsgebeurtenissen op.
Hulp Belangrijkste Constable Gary Beautridge van de Politie van Kent erkende in een persconferentie dat de politie hun reactie op het kamp sinds April van dit jaar had gepland. Die reactie merkte 1.400 ambtenaren, aan 26 verschillende krachten over Groot-Brittannië dat, in het gebied wordt gebracht. Zij werden gesteund door constant luchttoezicht. De Instantie van Havens Medway machtigde ook de politie secties van hun bylaws „afdwingen“ om protestors naderend de krachtcentrale de rivier te verhinderen.
De definitieve kosten van de het controleren verrichting zijn nog niet gekend, maar verscheiden tussen £1 miljoen en £8 miljoen gekend. Het wordt begrepen de Politie van Kent nadenkt van toepassing zijnd op het Bureau van het Huis voor financiële steun in de positie van miljard.
There has been a noticeable trend in recent years for the police to underreport numbers of demonstrators and protestors. In the case of Kingsnorth, the police set the attendance at 1,000. According to their own figures, therefore, they had provided a level of policing intended to overwhelm the protestors. The organisers’ own estimate of attendance was 1,500, giving a 1:1 ratio of police to protestors. Even the highest estimate only put attendance at 2,000.
That the police levels were aimed at discouraging protest was reinforced when Beautridge said he regarded “the majority of the protestors” as “law-abiding people there for a legitimate reason.” He justified the policing levels as a response to “a small hard core of people…prepared to use criminal tactics and criminal activity.” According to one report, this “small hard core” was set at just 150 people. As the camp’s legal spokesman Kevin Smith noted, “Every year police use the supposed existence of a hardcore minority as justification for the heavy-handedness and every year this hardcore minority fails to materialise.”
It is quite evident that the policing was aimed at deterring any form of protest. Protestors at the camp have described the constant attention of police helicopters, which served to disrupt meetings and speeches. There are also reports of police impounding vehicles being used by protestors to bring supplies into the camp.
In particular, protestors drew attention to the aggressive tactics of the riot police, who used batons and shields in making arrests. Several protestors were injured when police baton-charged them as they tried to enter a cornfield. Beautridge maintained that such a response was “proportionate…. Because of the level of resistance, officers were authorised to carry batons during two days of the protest. There are strict legal standards for their use and we gave clear warnings when any specialist team was deployed.”
Green MEP Caroline Lucas, who visited the camp, said she was “horrified that [the] police…have used pepper spray, riot gear, [and] physical intimidation.” The police controlled demonstrators with horses, dogs and trail bikes, as well as with constant helicopter coverage.
To sustain this level of intimidation and intrusion, the police sought extraordinary powers to stop and search protestors. Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act was implemented to authorise this. Initially, the Section 60 provisions were applied only to the immediate area of the camp. They were subsequently extended to cover the whole of the Hoo peninsula. The provision allows police to stop and search a suspect if an officer of superintendent rank or above believes there may be incidents of serious violence.
At Kingsnorth, Section 60 was used to monitor all visitors to the camp. One eyewitness describes joining a queue to be searched. The searching officer did not know who had authorised the searches. Having been frisked and had his bag searched, the witness was then issued with a pink slip. He had to show this to another three officers before he actually reached the camp. He was searched again when he tried to leave the camp. There were also reports of protestors being threatened with strip searches. Elsewhere there were reports of police attempting to use Section 60 to justify destruction of homemade rafts.
Lucas, along with Liberal Democrat MP Norman Baker and Labour MP Colin Challen, wrote to Kent Police to express concern about such use of discretionary powers. Lucas warned that this was “undermining our civil liberties.”
Lucas, amongst others, has also drawn attention to a booklet apparently dropped by an officer policing the camp. The booklet, “Policing Protest,” is produced by the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit and offers “tactical advice and guidance on policing single-issue domestic extremism.”
Police mounted a systematic programme of confiscation from the protestors during the searches. The police told press that they had confiscated many knives, although demonstrators described this as a smear tactic. Police also showed journalists a satirical board game (“War on Terror”) they had confiscated. There seems to have been a policy of making life as uncomfortable and awkward as possible for protestors. Other items confiscated included glue, soap, a clown costume, bits of carpet, toilet paper, disabled ramps, marker pens, blackboard paint, nuts and bolts for toilet cubicles, and banners.
They also confiscated demonstrators’ emergency radios and lifejackets. One demonstrator involved in the river-borne protest described a meeting with a local coast guard crew. The coast guards were complimentary about the demonstrators’ attention to safety, but criticised the police confiscations of lifejackets, saying, “It was irresponsible and could have put lives at risk.”
Such tactics were clearly designed to stifle any form of dissent and deter any future protests. Of particular concern in this regard is the complaint by the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) that its members were also subject to the same searches, manhandling, and observation. The NUJ is looking at legal challenges against “this unwarranted conduct by the police.” According to the NUJ, journalists were searched as they entered and left the camp. Searches continued after police were shown press cards. Journalists were also “pushed and shoved” by police, and filmed whilst using WiFi facilities at a local McDonalds.
Such developments indicate a determination to clamp down on any form of legitimate protest, and should be taken as a very serious attack on democratic rights.
Have Your Say: Britain: Policing of climate camp a major attack on democratic rights
Please read our posting guidelines before posting.
Alternatively you can discuss this report here.
This entry was posted on Saturday, August 16th, 2008 at 4:15 pm and is filed under Contributions & Guests . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Translations
Loading ...Related News
- Climate change protesters deny they are armed
- Climate protesters arrested after gluing themselves to bank
- Climate activists vow to stay at camp
- Serious Concerns Over Non Staged SOCPA Arrest
- Climate camp raided for a second time
Email This Page To A Friend
Latest Headlines
- 40,000 innocent children on police DNA files
- Older generation could scupper £4.4bn National Identity Scheme
- U.S. May Ease Police Spy Rules
- The CIA is training landscapers, poolmen, and interior designers
- VIDEO: The “Magic” of Disappearing Votes
- CIVILIANS PAY THE PRICE FOR IMPERIAL RIVALRIES IN GEORGIA
- Britain: Policing of climate camp a major attack on democratic rights
- DENVER PLANS ITS OWN GITMO FOR PROTESTERS
- Russia signs Georgia ceasefire deal
- Funding the White House campaign
More Breaking News
Archive
