Peaceful Protests Banned By Judge

.

Peaceful Protests Banned By Judge - Alex Thompson - Chief CH4 News Correspondent

Once upon a time there was a power station. And a lake. And a village next to the lake.

One day, the men in charge of the power station decided they had to do something with all the ash produced by burning so much coal at the power station.
"I know," they said, "let's fill in the lake with half a million tons of ash. OK - so it contains arsenic, but not that much. I'm sure the council in Oxford will say yes, that's ok."
"Yes - that's ok, " said the people in the planning department.
But the villagers were not at all happy. They protested.
And there, dear viewer, things would have stayed. Until Npower, which runs Didcot power station, suddenly did something extraordinary. They went along to the High Court one afternoon and got an injunction which is so wide-ranging it not only bans peaceful protest at or near the site of the lake, but it bans the media, or you, or anybody else, from filming the company as it goes about destroying the woods around the lake prior to filling it in.
The protesters and the media hadn't got a clue this was happening. They had no chance to put their side of the case. The only evidence the company produced in court was a bunch of largely anonymous witness statements from their security guards, who claimed they were harassed by protesters. Not one of these people was even in court, let alone cross-examined.
And so it is in Britain today. Under the Protection from Harassment Act of 1997 things which we claim to hold dear: freedom of peaceful protest, assembly, the press, have been disappeared at a stroke by High Court judges who only ever hear one side of the argument with 'evidence' which would be contested in any other kind of court sitting.
Corporations adore it since it stops any kind of meaningful protest. And politicians too seem quite happy to let all this simply continue behind closed doors.
At Radley Lake there has - Thames Valley Police tell us - not been a single arrest for any violent offience whatsoever. And yet a campaign of harassment was built on those witness statements and the protest and the ability of the media to cover it were shut down at a stroke.
So there you have it. Freedoms which people in this land fought long and hard for over centuries, are dispensed with at a stroke by uncontested evidence in a court.
Make no mistake. It's coming to a protest near you, unless somebody, somewhere, somehow gets up and decides that the Protection from Harassment Act needs rethinking from top to bottom.
You have been warned.
Oh! And you have also been injuncted, because as soon as you know about this injunction you are covered by it. Film or take pictures of what's happening to Radley Lake and you are looking at a maximimum of five years inside.
You have been warned (again).


.

1 Comments:

At 2:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Which reminds me...

Palace protest may prompt new law


Jason Hatch's protest caused security fears
Trespassing in royal buildings could become a specific criminal offence under plans being considered by ministers after recent protests.
It comes after the Fathers 4 Justice protest on a Buckingham Palace ledge.

On Thursday, a Tory peer complained that if an international terrorist got into the Palace, he could only be charged with "non-criminal trespass".

Home Office Minister Lady Scotland said the government was giving "anxious attention" to the issue.

There were a number of laws which could be used to prosecute Palace invaders but no specific ones, she said

"That is the issue to which we are now giving the most careful consideration, because we do think there may be a strong argument for introducing a specific ... criminal offence, just in relation to the Queen's premises and perhaps certain other security sites."

Foreign embassies

She said she hoped there would be an announcement soon on the issue.

Last month fathers campaigner Jason Hatch scaled a wall at the Palace dressed as Batman.

Metropolitan Police chief Sir John Stevens said he would have been shot had officers thought he was a terrorist.

In May it was reported that Home Secretary David Blunkett was considering new laws to give royal premises the same protection as foreign embassies.

Legislation creating a "royal trespass" law was first recommended after comedian Aaron Barschak gate crashed Prince William's 21st birthday party dressed in an Osama bin Laden beard at Windsor.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3742668.stm

 

Post a Comment

<< Home