Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat

pdxm said:
No, I think that people wishing to excercise their democratic right to peacefully protest to a reasonable extent such as it doesn't disportionately interfere with the rights of others should exercise judgement and prepare for it, maybe a couple of bottles of water, a packed lunch etc in a rucksack??
Click to expand...
So you are of the opinion that it is reasonable to imprison peaceful protesters and cut off their access to food, water and toilet facilities for up to 12 hours then and it's their fault if they don't bring along backpacks stuffed full of provisions, despite their being shops all around?
 
If mass-detention is justified (and I don't believe it is) then the least I'd expect is that protestors be given the same rights as an arrested murderer, or as close to it as is practical. In other words, if the police are going to detain people for hours, they should buy out the local branch of Pret A Manger
 
editor said:
So you are of the opinion that it is reasonable to imprison peaceful protesters and cut off their access to food, water and toilet facilities for up to 12 hours then and it's their fault if they don't bring along backpacks stuffed full of provisions, despite their being shops all around?
Click to expand...


Well we've already established that Climate Camp had made provision for food and that the guidance asked people to come well fed and with provisons for the day. http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/g20-practicalities. Most of the people attending were in fact grown adults were they not?
 
pdxm said:
No, I think that people wishing to excercise their democratic right to peacefully protest to a reasonable extent such as it doesn't disportionately interfere with the rights of others should exercise judgement and prepare for it, maybe a couple of bottles of water, a packed lunch etc in a rucksack???
Click to expand...
what, you mean enough to see you through a few hours of a demonstration?

what you're suggesting is sensible, but would still not be enough to see you through til 1am comfortably, though I suspect the climate campers would have been a lot more prepared than the people at the g20-meltdown.

As for the toilets, I agree they should have been provided, the first video clearly shows some, perhaps there weren't enough. Maybe the "organisers" should have provided some more??
Click to expand...
problem is that demonstrators have traditionally largely relied on the toilets in nearby bars, restaurants, tube stations etc. at least on the mobile bit of the demonstration, possibly supplemented by a few blocks of portaloos dotted around the place, and in the assembly and rally areas.

2 problems with this in this type of situation being..

firstly that the police will abitrarily order bars, restaurants, tube stations etc in the area to lock their doors, thereby removing the protestors access to toilet facilities.

secondly, that as protest organisers have no idea where a kettle will be imposed, they can have very little idea where to actually put the toilets to ensure they remain accessible throughout. For example, I've seen one video of the police lines moving down a road which actually had a block of portaloos on it, so that the portaloos went from being on the protestors side of the lines, to being the other side of the police lines... fuck all a protest organiser can do in that kind of situation really (actually, more likely the council who'd supplied them tbh)
 
free spirit said:
what, you mean enough to see you through a few hours of a demonstration?

what you're suggesting is sensible, but would still not be enough to see you through til 1am comfortably, though I suspect the climate campers would have been a lot more prepared than the people at the g20-meltdown.


problem is that demonstrators have traditionally largely relied on the toilets in nearby bars, restaurants, tube stations etc. at least on the mobile bit of the demonstration, possibly supplemented by a few blocks of portaloos dotted around the place, and in the assembly and rally areas.

2 problems with this in this type of situation being..

firstly that the police will abitrarily order bars, restaurants, tube stations etc in the area to lock their doors, thereby removing the protestors access to toilet facilities.

secondly, that as protest organisers have no idea where a kettle will be imposed, they can have very little idea where to actually put the toilets to ensure they remain accessible throughout. For example, I've seen one video of the police lines moving down a road which actually had a block of portaloos on it, so that the portaloos went from being on the protestors side of the lines, to being the other side of the police lines... fuck all a protest organiser can do in that kind of situation really (actually, more likely the council who'd supplied them tbh)
Click to expand...

I'll protest but only if it's comfortable! You can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed and water you for days if you give it a little thought.
 
Azrael said:
If mass-detention is justified (and I don't believe it is) then the least I'd expect is that protestors be given the same rights as an arrested murderer, or as close to it as is practical. In other words, if the police are going to detain people for hours, they should buy out the local branch of Pret A Manger
Click to expand...
I agree, also they should have toilet blocks and drinking water bowsers on standby ready to put into place if needed.

speaking as a festival organiser well accustomed to having to supply these things or be taken to court, I don't see why the police should be allowed to get away with this type of bullshit.
 
free spirit said:
I agree, also they should have toilet blocks and drinking water bowsers on standby ready to put into place if needed.

speaking as a festival organiser well accustomed to having to supply these things or be taken to court, I don't see why the police should be allowed to get away with this type of bullshit.
Click to expand...

Erm, the police weren't the organisers....
 
oh a side, the plainly obvious video beating of protestors by police should not be a side issue, just wanted to raise that, as PDXM seems to be quite successfully moving the argument along to ignore the fact that the brutality on unarmed and peaceful proteswtors as well as the kettling itself by the police was highly antagonistic and a *bit* wrong.

Lets not forget the violence on the polices part people.
 
Corax said:
Stop sliming your way around the point, mercenary.
Click to expand...

What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.
 
pdxm said:
I'll protest but only if it's comfortable! You can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed and water you for days if you give it a little thought.
Click to expand...
lol - can I quote you on that in this festival license application I'm writing?

no, we're not supplying any water, or catering facilities because festival goers can get enough stuff into a haversack to feed and water themselves for days...


the met are the ones who're creating the situation where people can't access shops, cafes, bars, restaurants or other standard facilities that are located close by to the protest, or simply to go home. The met should therefore assume the responsibility for supplying basic provisions of food, water, shelter and sanitary facilities for the people they've decided to kettle.
 
pdxm said:
What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.
Click to expand...
Boy are you missing the point. No one is expecting the authorities to lay on facilities. What they asking for, however, is not to be physically and aggressively prevented from leaving the protest to get food and water.

If the police choose to imprison peaceful protesters on frankly dubious grounds for hours on end, then it's up to them to furnish those people with basic amenities, just like you'd get if you were put in a cell.
 
The points made here:

editor said:
You don't even understand the difference between the two demos, do you?

But let's put it another way. Do you think it is right that persons wishing to exercise their democratic right to peacefully protest on important issues that affect their everyday lives should be expected to put up with being imprisoned and deprived of food, water and sanitation for anything up to 12 hours?

In other words, do you endorse the state's campaign to effectively try and silence protest by making it such an uncomfortable ordeal that many people will be dissuaded from attending?
Click to expand...

here:
Azrael said:
For perspective, under PACE, a person under arrest for the most heinous crimes has a statutory right to a solicitor, medical attention, water, three square meals, eight hours' sleep, and sanitation.

Protestors, against whom no reasonable suspicion for any crime has been shown or even claimed, have nothing.

In short, an arrested murderer has far more protection than a "kettled" protestor. And the useless Human Rights Act appears to be okay with this.
Click to expand...

and here:
FabricLiveBaby! said:
This.


The sad thing PDXM, is that this time the police activity hasn't just been notied by the protestors. This time, the actions have been noted by a whole load of other people.

I wasn't a protestor, and I'm not sure how much I agree with or disagree with what the protests were about, tbh I was a bit of a fence sitter. I know I disgaree with the bail outs and the growing gap apparent in the richh and poor, but that is all.

However after watching the live BBC news stream all afternoon, where a reporter was held in one of the kettles, and after looking at some of the photos and videos freely floating around on the internet, it seems pretty obvious to me and many of my mates (who arn't actually anti-police) that in this instance the police did nothing but aggravate the situation. It is plainly obious to any of the ordinary citizens who are savvy enough to use google, or open an e-mail. Itwas the police behaviouron the day that have made me realise that actually the protestors were right, and that no one, especially the police is there for the little man, but for protecting state ideals decided by a powerful few. The police by thier actions have shown this.

And I am not normally anti-police, I can appreicate that it is a thankless task, however on this occasion, the MET was wrong, and mean, and inhumane. And as an oridinary citizen I am appauled by the behaviour.

This time, it hasn't just been noted by smelly vegan hippies, but ordinary people. I am so shocked and appauled bu the bhaviour I have circcualted the videos and photos to my freinds, and hopefully they are sending them on too. When you start to alienate the ordinary people you run into trouble.

If I were you I would tell your police mates this, and that they should be vary careful, becasue next time you and your collegues will be watched very carefully indeed, by ordinary citizens, who are becomeing more and more aware of the police motives.

I don't intend to argue with you, I don't care how you wish to defend yourelf, becasue my mind is already made up and the police actions I saw on LIVE TV are indefensable.

All I am saying is: Behaviour Noted. IYSWIM.
Click to expand...

amongst others.
 
pdxm said:
Erm, the police weren't the organisers....
Click to expand...
the police organised the kettle.

the police have also in the past (not sure about here) ordered the closure of all bars, restaurants, off licenses and tube stations within the area, or the vicinity to close, thereby removing protestors access to food, watar, and sanitory facilities.

it's the police who are responsible for removing the protestors access to these facilities, and therefore it is their obligation to ensure that alternative provision is made.

IMO
 
pdxm said:
What point? You organise an event, you advertise the event people attend the event and you expect the police/local businesses/the council to provide the facilities. Seems a little bit of wishful thinking there.
Click to expand...

No. You expect the police to keep to the arrangements made, and not to suddenly kettle so that supply lines were outwith the kettle, and then disperse with brute force - all because, according to you - there was incompetence at police organisational level.
 
editor said:
Boy are you missing the point. No one is expecting the authorities to lay on facilities. What they asking for, however, is not to be physically and aggressively prevented from leaving the protest to get food and water.

If the police choose to imprison peaceful protesters on frankly dubious grounds for hours on end, then it's up to them to furnish those people with basic amenities, just like you'd get if you were put in a cell.
Click to expand...

Sightly different situation. You ain't allowed to bring a rucksack to a cell. Given the quality of custody food many would love to be able to. Fortunately from what I hear many people did manage to bring along refreshment, usually of the alcoholic type.
 
The protesters would have been better off if they'd been in police custody, where at least they were entitled to 3 meals in 24 hours together with reasonable access to water to drink.
 
pdxm said:
You seem to forget the court decision which said that the sort of cordons employed were lawful.
Click to expand...
You seem to not understand that judgment, which only decided that one particular cordon was lawful based on the facts presented to the high court. The most glaring difference between MD01 and April 1st is that on that occassion there were thousands of other protesters outside the cordon which, in the court's view, made earlier release impossible.

From the House of Lords' judgment:

"If measures of this kind are to avoid being prohibited by the Convention therefore it must be by recognising that they are not within the ambit of article 5(1) at all. In my opinion measures of crowd control will fall outside the area of its 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 Hope of Craighead

"Saadi (Application no 13229/03) is also important in the present context, because it seems to make it clear that, contrary to the appellant’s contention, the state of mind of the person responsible for the alleged detention can be a relevant factor in deciding whether article 5 has been infringed. In para 69, the court said that detention, even if complying with the national law, could be contrary to article 5 if “there has been an element of bad faith or deception on the part of the authorities". - Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury

"* Those who were not demonstrators, or were seriously affected by being confined, were promptly permitted to leave;" - Neuberger, summarising Tugendhat's original reasons for giving judgment in the police's favour.

Perhaps most relevant now:
"The senior officers conducting the operations were determined to avoid a fatality such as occurred in Red Lion Square on 15 June 1974." - Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe.
 
Can't see it making great headlines, "Police officer thinks guidance given on G20 website was sensible" shocker
 
pdxm said:
Sightly different situation. You ain't allowed to bring a rucksack to a cell. Given the quality of custody food many would love to be able to. Fortunately from what I hear many people did manage to bring along refreshment, usually of the alcoholic type.
Click to expand...

More about the bloody snacks... FFS

Can you not look directly at FabricLiveBoy's post? Does it make you uncomfortable?
 
pdxm said:
Can't see it making great headlines, "Police officer thinks guidance given on G20 website was sensible" shocker
Click to expand...

If nothing else, the Grauniad seems to be making some efforts to report on this. And the BBC seem to be doing their customary 'for the sake of neutrality' add-on reporting in retrospect. It will gather pace (lol) because there's plenty of privileged and hitherto naive people out there who saw and experienced the camp first hand and who are actually a bit shocked. So the evidence gets forwarded to friends, family. It's out there now and spreading, no matter what the media decide to report on.
 
Cesare (and others)

I was just thinking about which laws are relevant here, and am thinking that both the kettling without supplying basic ameneties, and the unprovoked violence against peaceful protestors would both fall into the category of 'breach of duty of care'.

as far as I can see anyone where video footage exists of them being hit by the police when they were demonstrating peacefully, would definately fall into this category. If the individual officer wasn't identifiable because they'd covered their numbers up, then this would surely make it more likely that a claim against the met as an institution would be successful.

I'm particularly thinking of the police violence against the climate campers, eg the copper smacking a climate camper in the head with the edge of the shield.


The depriving people of food, water, toilet facilities and shelter while kettled may be a bit more difficult, as it's impact on the individual is relatively low level, but on a risk assessment scoring thing it'd be scored as a relatively high overall risk because of the number of people it affected, so I'd think the same should apply here.


what do you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PR1Berske
Protests - further clampdowns
Replies
21
Views
1K
mihaly
M
Serge Forward
Festival of urban liberation - 21 April
Replies
3
Views
380
petee
petee
Kate Sharpley
1 in 12 Club Bradford fundraising (April 2024)
Replies
5
Views
497
redsquirrel
R
ska invita
Feb 1st 2023 Right to Strike Day of Action
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
ska invita
ska invita
ska invita
Day of Action: 1st October 2022
2 3 4
Replies
96
Views
4K
shroudedincloud
shroudedincloud
Back
Top Bottom