Category: Protest

  • A roundup of the coverage of the struggle for human rights and freedoms, from Mexico to Hong Kong

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Decision calling Project Servator intimidatory and oppressive fell afoul of ‘quality assurance process’

    Environmental activists who accused police of intimidation and harassment have had a review decision in their favour withdrawn in controversial circumstances.

    The decision, produced by the office of the police and crime commissioner for Devon and Cornwall, was particularly critical of Project Servator, a national anti-terrorism strategy, describing it, “increasingly being used as an intimidatory and oppressive national policing tactic”.

    Project Servator is “apparently increasingly being used as an intimidatory and oppressive national policing tactic”.

    While police witnesses were interviewed about the incident those visited by the police were not. “There appears to have been a quiescent acceptance of the police account of their actions by the [police] professional standards department.”

    Potential misconduct by police officers who visited the quarry and boatyard should also be considered.

    The matter should have been referred to the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct) “given the politically sensitive and national implications of such disproportionality in a protest situation”.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Cases have included climate, environment, human rights and anti-war protests where damage to property was not denied

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Stockholm, January 6, 2021 – Kazakhstan authorities must allow journalists to report freely on ongoing protests in the country and ensure their safety from officials and protesters, the Committee to Protect Journalists said today. 

    Since January 4, authorities in the Central Asian nation detained at least eight journalists reporting on mass protests in several cities and blocked at least two news sites following their coverage of nationwide protests, according to multiple news reports. Journalists reported being shot at by unidentified individuals, chased by protesters, and struck by law enforcement officers while reporting on the events. (CPJ could not independently confirm local media reports because of a communication shutdown.)

    The protests began in reaction to a sharp rise in the price of liquefied gas, but have since expanded into wider anti-government demonstrations. Internet across the country and telecommunications in the capital Nur-Sultan and the country’s largest city of Almaty were shut down around 5 p.m. Wednesday and authorities declared a state of emergency in Nur-Sultan, the Almaty region, and the western Mangystau region where the protests began. Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Information warned media outlets that the emergency regulations authorized an increase in the maximum penalty for “knowingly spreading false information” to between three and seven years in prison.

    “CPJ is extremely concerned by the developing situation in Kazakhstan as we receive reports of journalists’ arrest and acts of violence committed against them,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator, in New York. “We call on the Kazakh government to cease detaining members of the media, ensure the free flow of information, and take all possible measures to ensure the safety of journalists on the ground.”

    Gulnara Bazhkenova, chief editor of independent news site Ordawrote in a Telegram post that the site became inaccessible within Kazakhstan after the outlet reported on Tuesday that protesters were calling for the resignation of the government and the withdrawal of former president Nursultan Nazarbayev from public affairs.

    Shortly afterward, independent news agency KazTAG wrote on Telegram that its website became inaccessible after the agency refused to comply with a written demand from the Ministry of Information and Social Development of Kazakhstan to remove an article that the ministry claimed contained “knowingly false information” about police use of force against protesters.  

    On January 4, Almaty police briefly detained Qasym Amanzhol, the acting head of Radio Azattyq’s Almaty bureau, the Kazakh service of the U.S. Congress-funded broadcaster Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, while he was filming protests in the city, according to a report by his employer. Despite Amanzhol showing them his press credentials, police held the journalist for two hours at the Medeu district police station before releasing him and apologizing, but without explaining the reason for his detention, according to the report.

    In other arrests on January 4, police in the southern city of Taraz detained Aizhan Auelbekova, a correspondent with independent newspaper Vremya, Daniyar Alimkul, a correspondent with independent TV station 7 Kanal, and Nurbolat Zhanabekuly, a correspondent with independent TV station 31 Kanal, while they were covering local protests, according to news reports

    Officers released Alimkul and Zhanabekuly at the scene but held Auelbekova for more than three hours in a Zhambyl region police station before releasing her without giving a reason for her detention, according to these reports and the journalist’s Facebook page.

    In Almaty, police detained Bek Baitas, an editor for Orda, while he was filming protests on Monday evening, despite him showing his press card, according to a Telegram post by Bazhkenova. Bazhkenova said that police took Baitas to Almaly district police station where they twisted his arms and broke his phone, Bazhkenova wrote.  

    In Nur-Sultan, plainclothes police in Nur-Sultan surrounded the apartment of Makhambet Abzhan, a reporter for independent news site Exclusive, who has been covering the protests on his Telegram blog Abzhan News and commenting on Russian television, turned off his electricity, and prevented him from leaving for the night, according to Telegram posts on Abzhan News.

    Nur-Sultan police also arrested Radio Azattyq editor Darkhan Omirbek while he was reporting on Monday night’s protests, despite him presenting his press ID, according to a report by Radio Azattyq and a live stream broadcast by the journalist following his arrest. Police took Omirbek to Almaty district police station and questioned him for four and a half hours before releasing him, the report stated. The journalist told CPJ by messaging app that it is unclear if he is suspected of committing any offense.

    On January 5, Bazhkenova reported that Orda journalist Leonid Rasskazov was hit in the back by a rubber bullet fired by police and Baitas was hit in the face by shrapnel from a police stun grenade while reporting in Almaty.

    Also in Almaty, KazTAG reported that a protester ordered its camera crew to stop filming and then chased them with a paving stone. When the journalists reached their vehicle, protesters began to hit and rock the vehicle, the agency said.  

    Omirbek told CPJ that unidentified individuals in Almaty shot at Radio Azattyq’s reporter Ayan Qalmurat and camera operator Sanat Nurbek on January 5, adding that Radio Azattyq had decided to recall its reporters in the city due to the dangerous situation. In Nur-Sultan, riot police hit Radio Azattyq reporter Nurgul Tappayeva in the back, said Omirbek.

    Around 11 a.m. on January 5, police in Uralsk detained independent journalist Lukpan Akhmedyarov and questioned him at a local police station over alleged participation in an extremist organization, according to reports. He was released around 2 p.m., with a summons to attend further questioning later that day at 4 p.m., but CPJ was unable to confirm any further details.

    At around the same time, also in Uralsk, police detained Serik Yesenov, a reporter with the independent news site Uralskaya Nedelya, while he was filming army vehicles in the city center, according to a report by his employer. Yesenov informed police that he was a journalist, but they grabbed his camera, deleted his footage and took him to Abay district police station, before releasing him after an unspecified amount of time, according to the report.

    On Wednesday afternoon, protesters in Almaty stormed a building housing the editorial offices of several broadcasters, including independent Kazakh television station KTK, the local offices of Commonwealth of Independent States-funded broadcaster Mir 24, and Russian state-funded broadcaster Sputnik, and raided these outlets’ offices, damaging equipment, news reports stated. Orda reported that protesters detained journalists in the building for around an hour before leading them out of the building. Mir 24 and Sputnik have since confirmed that their employees left the building safely.

    CPJ emailed the Interior Ministry of Kazakhstan and the Ministry of Information and Social Development for comment but did not receive a response.

    Editor’s note: The second paragraph of this report has been corrected to reflect that not all of the detained journalists were formally arrested.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • The jury is currently considering its verdict in the trial of four of the people who toppled a statue of slave trader Edward Colston. On 4 January, Bristol Crown Court heard closing speeches from the defence and the prosecution.

    The pulling down of the statue happened during Bristol’s huge Black Lives Matter demonstration on 7 June 2020.

    The trial of the Sage Willoughby, Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford, and Jake Skuse – dubbed the ‘Colston Four’ – has been ongoing since last December, and 4 January was the first day back in court after a break for Christmas and New Year.

    Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh – the defence barrister for Rhian Graham – told the jury in her closing speech that Colston was responsible for the enslavement of 84,000 Black people – including 12,000 children – and the deaths of 19,000 people. She said that a:

    line in the sand was drawn on 7 June 2020 by those who joined together to pull the statue down and to dump it in the harbour. They recognised the need to make clear that Colston’s victims, those 84,000 Black lives more than three times the total number of the Black community in Bristol today that they mattered. That those Black lives matter. That they will not be forgotten or airbrushed out of history. That their descendants’ pain will not be ignored. That their slaver their tormenter will not continue to have his crimes whitewashed, as he towers above them on his pedestal.

    She said that those enslaved by Colston were:

    torn from their homes and families; chained; whipped; branded with a red hot iron with the initials of his company; and shipped across the sea as things – not as human beings – on a journey of horror

    She continued:

    You heard about the slave ships… You’ve heard about the chilling term “wastage”. You heard about the rapes and beatings. You heardabout it taking seven years to literally work an enslaved person to death.

    Raj Chada – defence counsel for Jake Skuse – said to the jury:

    The statue of Edward Colston, standing in the centre of Bristol, [was] utterly indecent, offensive and disgraceful. We all know that.

    An act of defiance against racism

    The Bristol demonstration was part of the global Black Lives Matter movement that came in the wake of the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police.

    Ní Ghrálaigh told the jury:

    On 25 May 2020 shortly after 8:20 pm, African American George Floyd  was murdered by police officer Derek Chauvin, who knelt on his neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds until he stopped breathing. The video of his long drawn out killing went viral around the world. People heard his repeated pleas of “I can’t breathe” and his desperate cry to his dead mother

    People in Bristol were quick to join the movement. On 7 June, 10,000 people gathered on College Green for the biggest in a series of powerful Black Lives Matter demonstrations. Tiffany Lyare – one of the demonstrators – told Vogue Magazine at the time:

    I didn’t want to protest just because of the loss of George Floyd’s life, but because of the fact that I am also black and I have experienced discrimination and racism first hand

    Lyare added:

    It almost felt like it was a personal attack to myself in a way

    We all toppled Colston

    As the marched passed the statue of Edward Colston, people paused and began to work together to remove the statue by putting a rope around its neck and pulling.

    The court was reminded that one of the police witnesses earlier in the case had estimated that thousands of people had been involved in taking the statue down. According to Ní Ghrálaigh:

    Police Officer Julie Hayward estimated that there were in excess of 3,000 people around the statue, just under a third of her estimated total of at least 10,000 marchers.

    These included:

    Those people around the statue who joined together spontaneously to pull as one on the rope that Rhian Graham had supplied [and] those people who applauded them as they did.

    Ní Ghrálaigh told the court that:

    After the slave trader was toppled, and the jubilations were over, a Black man knelt on Edward Colston’s neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds, the length of George Floyd’s slow murder. The statue was rolled to the harbour and unceremoniously dumped in the water.

    Chada told the jury that Jake Skuse was one of the people who helped drag the statue across the cobblestones to the harbour. According to Chada, the cobblestones were:

    cobbles which in his mind signified where people would have been dragged unwillingly in centuries before, dragged to the harbour in the symbolic act of being dumped there.

    At least I wont have to see that fucking slave trader on my way to work anymore

    After the toppling of Colston, hundreds of messages of support were left at the foot of the – now empty – plinth. Some of them read:

    I want to send my gratitude to the people who participated in the toppling of the Colston statue. It was never an erasing of culture but creating a better informed history…

    Power to the people. Equality is Quality.

    and:

    At least I wont have to see that fucking slave trader on my way to work anymore.

    Aftermath

    The events of 7 June – and the momentum of the global Black Lives Matter movement – led to the renaming of Bristol’s Colston Hall and a decision to rename two schools in Bristol named after the slave trader. The court also heard that a pub in Bristol changed its name; that the stained glass windows and other dedications to Colston had been removed from St Mary Redcliffe Church and Bristol Cathedral, and that Colston Tower has been renamed Beacon Tower. The Colston Society also voted to close itself down.

    The court heard that the toppling of the statue of Colston had been celebrated in Trinidad and had been mentioned during the funeral of George Floyd in the US. Ní Ghrálaigh told the jury:

    Gloria Daniel, the great, great granddaughter of the enslaved child John Isaac, emphasised the significance of the toppling. She said that it served as a marker that we had finally arrived at a place in history where  people would no longer tolerate the continuing dehumanisation of Black people.

    Despite the massive public support for the toppling of the statue, Avon & Somerset Police – egged on by Priti Patel – made a series of arrests and eventually charged the four people who are in court with criminal damage. The Glad Colston’s Gone campaign commented at the time:

    Hundreds can clearly be seen on camera to have been involved in various activities that led to this object being pushed into the harbour. Despite this, authorities have decided to single out four people

    In response to the statue toppling, the Tory government’s controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill is proposing a new offence of damaging national monuments, which would make actions like the one against the Colston statue punishable by up to ten years imprisonment.

    ‘If you have a festering cancer like Colston, you cut it out’

    Tom Wainwright – the defence barrister for Milo Ponsford – likened the removal of the statue to removing a cancer:

    If you have a cancer like Colston festering in your city, you cut it out. Even a new plaque would only have been a sticking plaster. Cutting it out will leave a scar, so that people remember what was there in the past and make sure it doesn’t return, but only once it is gone can the body heal. You have heard during this trial of the positive impact this action had, in prompting action where there was lethargy, promoting understanding where there was ignorance, provoking discussion where there was silence. Not just in this city, not just in this country but around the world. Bristol, like its tower, is no longer weighed down by the name of Colston but is a beacon showing how to bring communities together.

    Stephen Clarke – who is an ex-lawyer observing the trial – tweeted:

    Clarke tweeted this about defence barrister Liam Walker’s closing speech on behalf of Sage Willoughby:

    A ‘deliberate defence’ of the slave trade

    The court heard that the statue was erected almost two centuries after Colston’s death, due primarily to the efforts and funds of James Arrowsmith. Ní Ghrálaigh told the court that Arrowsmith was part of the Society of Merchant Venturers

    This was the same society that Colston had been part of, and which had been instrumental in pushing forward centuries of white supremacy, enslavement, and colonisation.

    Ní Ghrálaigh explained the context of the memorialisation of the erection of the Colston statue in 1880:

    As you have heard, the statue of Colston was erected 170 years after Colston’s death. That was nearly 90 years after the slave trade had finally been outlawed in Britain.The statue celebrated someone from the distant past whom James Arrowsmith knew had made his fortune from slavery. Some historians believe that
    it was erected in direct response to the statue that went up the previous year to Edmund Burke, an opponent of the slave trade.

    The statue would not just have been a whitewash of Colston’s role in the slave trade. If those historians are right, it would have been a deliberate defence of the trade, at a time when the depravity of treating human beings as things had long been laid bare

    The judge in the case reminded the jury of the evidence of Jonathan Finch, head of Culture and Creative Industries for Bristol Council, who told the court under cross-examination from the defence that “concerns had been raised” about the statue at least as far back as the early twentieth century, and that campaigns had been calling for its removal since at least the 1990s.

    The jury was reminded that Finch admitted that people felt “very strongly” about it.

    But Chada told the jury that the council had done nothing about these community concerns:

    Despite knowing about all about its offensive nature, the statue was displayed for over 100 years. And the Council did nothing. They achieved absolutely nothing but over 100 years of inaction.

    Ní Ghrálaigh and Chada told the jury that – after years of public pressure – the council had considered correcting the plaque, which extolled the virtue of Colston. However, the correction was thwarted when the Society of Merchant Venturers intervened.

    Ní Ghrálaigh pointed out that Cleo Lake –  former lord mayor of Bristol – and said it embarrassing” that the defendantswere in the dock for doing something that many democrats in the City believed should have been done decades ago“.

    Both Chada and Ní Ghrálaigh invited the jury to ask themselves why the council were appearing as witnesses for the prosecution for the pulling down of the statue. According to Ní Ghrálaigh:

    Indeed, members of the Jury, you might think what on earth is the council doing giving evidence to support a conviction in this case, having itself so abjectly failed to deal with the statue for so many decades?

    The defence argued that the four defendants had a lawful excuse for the toppling of Colston.

    According to Ní Ghrálaigh

    Rhian Graham, and the many others who pulled down the statue recognised the need to say: this is not Bristol. A slave trader is not Bristol. We will not continue to dress up a devil in angels’ robes.

    “The unfinished business of a now discredited memory of slavery

    Bristol Radical History Group has published a collection of statements by Bristolians in support of the Colston topplers. You can read the full document here, but we thought it would be appropriate to end this piece by publishing one of them – written by a Black Bristolian.

    This statement is by Ros Martin – a local artist – who was arrested in January 2021 for attending a protest in support of the Colston topplers. Martin’s arrest and prolonged detention was condemned as another example of racist and discriminatory policing. She made the following statement at the time in support of the Colston Four:

    We take control of colonisation and slavery’s transatlantic narrative and legacies in our city through our actions of repair, reflection, remembrance the calling forth and honouring of African ancestors, whose blood and brutalised lives in plantation in the Caribbean and Americas built up the wealth of this city.

    Linking past and present we can vision a better future, one in which we move from being mere bystanders to calling out and actioning a more just Bristol for all.

    The toppling of the Colston statue… is the unfinished business of a now discredited memory of slavery in the city tainted in monuments to the so called ‘great and good of the city’, epitomising all that is selfserving and disingenuous about the wielding of power, not just in the past but currently in our midst.

    Thank you for pulling down the statue, such a burden lifted. Onwards in struggle

    Featured image via Youtube

    By Tom Anderson

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • This story is part of Grist’s 2021 Comic Recap — an illustrated look back on some of the year’s biggest climate stories. Read the other installments, click here and here.

    This was a big year for pipeline policy. From the cancellation of the Keystone XL pipeline to states enacting harsh laws to criminalize and curb pipeline protests, the fight to stop oil and gas infrastructure saw major wins — and major losses — in 2021.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    Joe Biden started his term in January by canceling the Keystone XL pipeline via executive order. That’s after more than a decade of Indigenous-led activism against the project.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr / Getty Images

    But the tough-on-pipelines agenda didn’t last. In May, the Army Corps of Engineers upheld a Trump-era position, allowing the Dakota Access Pipeline to continue to operate, despite the fact that a key permit for the pipeline was canceled by a federal judge.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    Over the summer, protesters flocked to Northern Minnesota where the Line 3 pipeline, which carries tar sands oil across more than 200 bodies of water, threatens Anishanaabe treaty rights and could violate U.S. treaty law.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr / Getty Images

    Over 900 hundred people were arrested in protests over the summer. Many are facing felony charges.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    Despite protests, the Biden administration did not cancel the pipeline, which went online on October 1st.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    According to analysis by the Indigenous Environmental Network, Indigenous-led resistance to 21 fossil fuel projects has stopped or delayed greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to a quarter of annual U.S. and Canadian emissions – or about 400 coal-fired power plants.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    But nationwide, the risks of protesting pipelines like Line 3 and Keystone XL are getting higher, as sixteen states have passed laws since 2017 increasing penalties, including fines and jail time, for protesting pipelines. 

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    And Biden isn’t moving on either Line 3 or DAPL, despite his climate commitments.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    Despite Biden’s refusal to stop pipelines, there’s still hope: young Indigenous land defenders and water protectors, like 17-year-old Autumn Peltier, continue to fight the construction of oil and gas infrastructure on traditional and treaty territories.

    Grist / Alexandria Herr

    There’s no doubt protests and legal battles against major fossil fuel infrastructure projects will continue into 2022.

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline An Illustrated guide to 2021’s pipeline battles on Dec 23, 2021.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • “Democracy had well and truly broken down” over the statue of Edward Colston in Bristol, a protester accused of toppling it has said.

    The memorial to the 17th century slave trader was ripped down during a Black Lives Matter march in the city centre on 7 June 2020.

    It became an iconic moment in the wave of anti-racism protests staged around the world in the aftermath of the killing of George Floyd by a police officer in the US.

    Rhian Graham is one of four people on trial at Bristol Crown Court facing a charge of criminal damage.

    Petitions and previous protests failed

    Giving evidence on Monday, Graham pointed out that there have been campaigns to have the statue of Colston removed from the town centre going back to the 1920s.

    Multiple petitions and protests and even support from a Bristol MP had failed to bring about any change, she said.

    A plan to affix a new plaque on the statue detailing Colston’s role in the slave trade had petered out when the Society of Merchant Venturers – a local philanthropic organisation – intervened.

    The group, which administered much of Colston’s £70,000 legacy to the city after his death, wanted the proposed wording changed to ensure his philanthropy was mentioned before his role in the slave trade.

    It also wanted any mention of the trafficking of children removed.

    Black Lives Matter protests
    The statue of Edward Colston was thrown in Bristol Harbour (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Broken democracy

    Marvin Rees, Bristol’s Mayor, decided to halt the plan because he disagreed with how far the text on the new plaque had been diluted.

    Graham said Colston had “perfected” the slave trade, adding: “No amount of philanthropy excuses you from that amount of hurt and suffering.”

    She described the Society of Merchant Venturers as “an undemocratic body of people, wealthy people, who have a lot of power and influence in the city”.

    Graham added:

    It is that abuse of power that causes so much frustration – the abuse of power and their stepping in and not allowing the truth of history to be told.

    She continued:

    At that point, what do you do? How long must you ask to be heard and not be listened to?

    I believe the council should have done something earlier, I do know that our MP, Thangam Debbonaire (Bristol West) had been calling for it to come down since 2018 and nothing was happening.

    I believe democracy had well and truly broken down around that statue.

    “Over 100 years of dissent – someone should have listened.”

    Graham said that she had signed petitions to have the statue removed, but did not see any point in writing to her MP seeing as Debbonaire had already spoken out about it.

    “(The council) had long enough to recognise how much harm a monument to a slave trader does in a very multi-cultural city – it doesn’t take much to realise that harm,” Graham said.

    “Over 100 years of dissent – someone should have listened.”

    Graham has admitted going to the protest with a rope in her bag, and helping to pull the statue down, but denies the damage done was criminal.

    ”By removing that statue we were removing a great symbol of oppression that towers over our community and is an offence to so many,” she said.

    “That was an act of solidarity and compassion, not violence.”

    ‘The Colston statue: What next?’
    The statue of Edward Colston is now on display at the M Shed Museum (Ben Birchall/PA)

    Graham told the court she did not have a background in politics or activism but had become much more aware of racism and inequality after moving to Bristol five years ago.

    “From 2019 I started to make more friends who had more of a passion for history, politics and equality,” she said.

    “I felt a bit embarrassed about my own knowledge and felt I needed to try and engage more with the world.”

    Graham continued:

    Having grown up in a predominantly white neighbourhood in Norfolk I experienced a lot of casual racism and homophobia and sexism.

    I didn’t think of myself as racist but the more I understood the experience of a black person on a daily basis, I felt I had been a terrible ally and I feel like I could have been more supportive.

    The realisation of the privilege I have because of the skin colour I have made me feel like I needed to stand in solidarity for black lives.

    The trial, which is due to conclude at the end of this week, continues.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Call for opposition to counter ministers’ ‘cynical attempt to bypass parliamentary scrutiny’

    The Labour party has been urged to take advantage of a unique opportunity to vote down a raft of last-minute amendments to an already controversial crime bill, which human rights activists have described as “a dangerous power grab”.

    The 18 pages of amendments to the police, crime, sentencing and courts bill were introduced by government peers in November, on the day nine members of the protest group Insulate Britain appeared in court charged with contempt.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Tribal members and environmental advocates filed a lawsuit against the Oregon Department of Justice on Tuesday for “illegal domestic spying” through its Oregon TITAN Fusion Center – one of approximately 80 intelligence hubs tasked with surveilling potential domestic terrorists. 

    “It is astonishing and disturbing to become the target of a well-resourced secret police, solely because of my participation in peaceful rallies opposing a harmful fossil fuel pipeline across my ancestral lands,” Ka’ila Farrell-Smith, an environmental and Indigenous rights advocate, said in a press release

    Farrell-Smith is a plaintiff in the case and a member of the Klamath Tribe. She has protested against Jordan Cove, a 229-mile long natural gas pipeline that would have run through ancestral lands in Oregon. She has also created protest art and organized against a lithium mine in Nevada. 

    Other plaintiffs include Rowena Jackson, Francis Eatherington, and Sarah Westover. Jackson is also a member of the Klamath Tribe, a water protector, and works at the Klamath Tribes Administrative Office. Eatherington is president of the Oregon Women’s Land Trust, a conservation nonprofit. Westover was an organizer with No LNG Exports Coalition, an alliance of groups opposed to the Jordan Cove pipeline.  

    According to the lawsuit, “fusion centers” have little oversight and less is known about them. At least 3,000 state and federal employees work at fusion centers where they monitor individuals that pose possible domestic terrorist threats. Using tips from the public, social media, public records, and governmental materials, Oregon’s TITAN Fusion Center collects and shares data with “more than 170 local law enforcement agencies, dozens of federal and state intelligence hubs, and an unknown number of public and private partners,” the lawsuit states.  

    Following 9/11, at least 80 fusion centers have been created to prevent future terrorist attacks, but a 2012 Senate investigation found that they are ineffective and come at a cost of $330 million to taxpayers yearly. Originally created by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the cost of funding them has largely shifted to states. According to the lawsuit, Oregon’s TITAN facility is run through Oregon’s Department of Justice’s Criminal Intelligence Division.

    The lawsuit, filed by the Policing Project at the New York University School of Law, which partners with communities and police to promote accountability, claims that TITAN is illegally spying on environmental advocates that aren’t breaking the law. The Policing Project has also been involved with a Microsoft case concerning compulsory data sharing with law enforcement, and an audit of Ring, a video doorbell company that works with police departments across the country. 

    “None of the Plaintiffs engage in or support, nor have ever engaged in or supported, criminal activity that would warrant Oregon Department of Justice’s attention or fall within Oregon Department of Justice’s delegated powers,” the lawsuit states.

    Jeff Rosenthal, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, said in a press release that TITAN “has repeatedly abused its unchecked power over law-abiding Oregon citizens.” The lawsuit states that TITAN also used surveillance software to physically track the location of Black Lives Matter protestors, using the information to create a threat report against Oregon’s own Department of Justice’s director of civil rights, as well as creating reports on the Women’s March. 

    “There is not a single Oregon law or regulation that gives the state Department of Justice the power to run a generalized spy agency,” said Barry Friedman, a law professor and the founding director of the Policing Project, in a press release. “That TITAN exists without any legislative authority flouts the basic principles of democratic governance.” 

    In a statement, the Department of Justice told Portland’s KATU, “We are reviewing the lawsuit, and will respond in court, but on initial review many of the examples cited in the lawsuit occurred several years ago and have been addressed.” 

    Plaintiffs hope the lawsuit will result in an end to TITAN’s surveillance activities.

    “Civil rights and privacy advocates have been sounding the alarm about fusion centers for years,” said Farhang Heydari, executive director of the Policing Project, in a statement. “But TITAN is one of the worst offenders.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Indigenous and environmental activists say they were illegally spied on on Dec 17, 2021.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • A group of NHS workers have written an open letter in response to Boris Johnson’s message to healthcare staff. And it makes for uncomfortable reading – if you’re the PM, of course.

    Johnson: bare-faced cheek

    On Tuesday 14 December, Johnson released an open letter to NHS workers. In it, he was asking them for help with the coronavirus (Covid-19) booster vaccination programme. Johnson said:

    I would like to thank each and every one of you for your incredible efforts during the COVID-19 pandemic. I know it has placed extraordinary strain on all NHS staff… On behalf of the whole country, I want to acknowledge and praise your extraordinary hard work.

    But some NHS staff were not happy with Johnson’s words. So, a group of them wrote a reply. It published the letter on Twitter. And the response to it has been huge.

    NHS Workers Say FU

    NHS Workers Say No is a grassroots campaign group. It’s been at the forefront of action against the Tory-created NHS crisis this year: from protests outside parliament, to huge petitions, via campaigning videos. NHS Workers Say No has been relentless in its fight for a safe NHS that pays it staff properly and works for everyone.  Now, it’s written an open letter to Johnson. It mimics the style of his letter. And it’s blown up on Twitter:

    The letter says, mocking the PM’s own words:

    Firstly, we would like to ask each and every one of you why, despite our incredible efforts, you continue to exploit us. The COVID-19 pandemic placed extraordinary strain on an already demoralised, devalued and depleted workforce, having spent ten years paying for your austerity measures. On behalf of the whole NHS workforce, and the rest of the country using our services, we want you to acknowledge the damage you have caused, apologise, and let someone else fix your mess.

    It then goes on to talk about the issues with staff shortages (nearly 100,000 to be precise); NHS pay (the dire government increase of 3%), and the physical, mental, and emotional impact all of this – plus the pandemic – has had on staff.

    “Please resign”

    The letter was written by Kirsty Brewerton, one of the founders of the group. She told The Canary:

    I wrote the letter because nobody seems to be listening, and nobody seems to care. Who is supporting frontline workers? Our government? No. Our employers? No. We can’t carry on like this, but we aren’t being given any other option.

    The letter ends by saying:

    We so wish we could thank you for all that you’ve done to support us through this, but in fact you’ve made it far more difficult for most of us. On behalf of the whole nation, please resign

    We all need to act

    Holly Turner from NHS Workers Say No told The Canary:

    There was a sense of outrage amongst NHS workers when we saw the pitiful ‘thank you’ letter from Johnson. We have been left in a vulnerable and dangerous position due to over ten years of austerity utterly decimating our services. We are sick to death of gestures, we need action.

    It’s now up to opposition politicians and the public to firstly support NHS workers – but also to force change in the NHS before the Tories do any more damage.

    Featured image via NHS Workers Say No and 10 Downing Street – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Syarhei Tsikhanouski arrested in 2020 as he prepared to challenge Alexander Lukashenko

    Syarhei Tsikhanouski, the husband of Belarus’s opposition leader, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, has been sentenced to 18 years in jail for organising mass unrest and inciting social hatred, the official Belta news agency reported.

    Five supporters tried with Tsikhanouski were jailed for 14-16 years.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  •  

    The December 3, 2021, episode of CounterSpin included an archival interview with the ACLU’s Vera Eidelman about anti-protest laws. Janine Jackson originally interviewed Eidelman for the July 2, 2021, show. This is a lightly edited transcript.

          CounterSpin211203Eidelman.mp3

     

    Janine Jackson: What do the freedoms we tell ourselves define this country and its project actually mean in 2021? If you think the answers are to be found in history, you might be missing the point. The US is engaged in radical (“to the root”) debate right now about what democracy means, what civil liberties mean, and what kind of society we want to live in. We’re in history right now; this is what it looks like.

    So what are the front-burner issues in terms of free speech, rights of assembly, the right to protest—to disrupt business as usual, which we know is central to making actual change?

    Our next guest thinks about these questions every day. Vera Eidelman is staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. She joins us now by phone. Welcome to CounterSpin, Vera Eidelman.

    Vera Eidelman: Thank you so much for having me.

    Brandi Levy

    Brandi Levy, known as B.L. to the Supreme Court (photo via ACLU)

    JJ: I wanted to talk, first, about B.L. v. Mahanoy Area School District. I know that many listeners haven’t heard anything about this case, but it really gets at: When do you lose your right to free speech or free expression? Can you talk a little bit about what was at stake in that case, and your response to the Court’s ruling?

    VE: Absolutely. So Mahanoy Area School District v. B.L. was the most important case about young people’s free speech rights in the last 50 or so years. The issue at stake in that case was a school’s authority to discipline a student for what they said or expressed outside of school hours, off of school property, that was not harassing or threatening in any way.

    Our client in that case, “B.L.,” was, when the case began, a 14-year-old who had tried out for the varsity cheerleading team at her public school. She unfortunately didn’t make it onto varsity, and was very upset. And she took to Snapchat, on a weekend, at a local convenience store, with her friends, not wearing anything that reflected the school, not mentioning the school or anyone at the school by name; instead typing, “f school, f softball, f cheer, f everything,” on top of a photograph of her and her friend raising their middle fingers. (They did not say “f”; they used the actual word, just for clarity.)

    JJ: Right.

    VE: And the school suspended her from the cheerleading squad for the entire year.

    And the ACLU of Pennsylvania took up her case, arguing that the school could not discipline her under the diminished rules that attach to student speech rights inside of the school environment, given that she was out of school, speaking her mind on the weekend, online.

    And the Supreme Court ultimately agreed with us, holding that the school cannot apply the same diminished rule that attaches inside of school outside of school. Because otherwise, students would be carrying the schoolhouse on their back 24 hours a day, seven days a week, unable to ever fully explore their views, unable to fully express themselves, for fear of always worrying that they might be deemed “disruptive,” which is the standard that typically applies in schools.

    And the court also recognized that the school itself actually has an interest in enabling students to engage in dissenting and unpopular speech—recognizing, of course, that what that means in any particular school district will vary by the reality of that school district—because the school really is, in the words of Justice Breyer, a “nursery for democracy,” and one of the goals of the school should be to teach kids what it means to have free speech rights.

    JJ: And as a parent with an activist child, I hear that word “disruptive,” and it just sets something off, because obviously that is a contextual term, as you’ve just described. But that sounds a little worrisome, just on its face, at the level of language, to make that the standard.

    VE: Absolutely. That was the main thing that we were very worried about in this case, that the school might win in arguing that it can apply that very subjective viewpoint-based standard outside of the school.

    JJ: So, OK: Schools are nurseries to help kids develop their voice, and to learn that they are allowed to use their voice, and in terms of using it meaningfully, in terms of changing things. So then those young people become adults, and they want to go out in the street to use their voice. So now we’re at my second question, which is: This spate, not new but increasing, of anti-protest legislation. Can you just talk about the range of laws that we’re seeing spring up, and what they are doing or trying to do?

    Vera Eidelman

    Vera Eidelman: “We have…seen the continuation and deepening of the anti-democratic, anti-protest legislative trend around the country.”

    VE: Yes, unfortunately, we have, as you mentioned, seen the continuation and deepening of the anti-democratic, anti-protest legislative trend around the country. For at least the last five years now, we have seen legislators respond to vocal, powerful, full-throated advocacy, not by listening to what their constituents are saying, but instead by seeking to create new laws that would silence them.

    Examples of the types of laws range from increasing penalties on laws that already make something criminal—so, for example, laws that already criminalize trespass, or refusal to disperse, or failure to obey an officer; all of those things are already illegal, and these laws would seek to increase the penalties that attach. In some cases, the bills seek to increase the penalties, not just in terms of criminal time, which of course is incredibly impactful, but also in terms of restricting people’s access to public employment, to public office and even to public benefits; things like access to scholarships for school, food stamps and the like.

    In addition, some of these laws seek to really punish, not unlawful conduct, but association: the fact that people are in the same place at the same time. A number of the bills that have been proposed—including some even that have passed, for example, in Florida—are incredibly ambiguous as to whether they punish an individual who has themselves engaged in violence or property destruction, for example, or every other person around when that occurs, regardless of whether they were involved, regardless of what they themselves think of that conduct. So we’re really seeing a lot of bills, and even a few bills that have become law, that seek to criminalize association, criminalize the act of gathering together to make our voices heard.

    JJ: I think if I could pick out one thing, the idea of laws that say it’s OK to hit protesters with your car. I just think that even for folks who, you know, may have complicated feelings, that’s just mind-blowing. What’s going on with that?

    VE: I completely agree. And I think it’s particularly mind-blowing, given that these aren’t just hypotheticals. We know that Heather Heyer died in Charlottesville as a result of someone hitting her with his car; we’ve also seen many other protesters injured at protests by cars. And so I think it is a particularly perverse legislative trend that we are seeing. And a clear message that it sends to people who are thinking of joining with others and going out onto the streets is, “You better think twice, because you might get hit by a car—and if you are, you might have no recourse.”

    JJ: Exactly, exactly.

    Let me ask you, finally, about media, because I often have noticed that, broadly speaking, corporate media love people speaking up, until they’re an organized group and they’re speaking up in the street, and then somehow they move from being individuals with a voice, to “interested” activists, and it’s somehow different. It’s like, “Protest is great, but keep it quiet.”

    NPR: Wave Of 'Anti-Protest' Bills Could Threaten First Amendment

    NPR (4/30/21)

    And I see NPR, which has done all kinds of favorable coverage, but then I see this headline, “Wave of ‘Anti-Protest’ Bills…”—and “anti-protest” is in quotes, like maybe it’s not true—”Wave of ‘Anti-Protest’ Bills Could Threaten First Amendment.” Well, could and threaten; now we’re at two degrees of separation. And I just wonder if media are bringing home the threat that’s happening here.

    So that’s just me, but I would like to ask you: What would you like to see more of, maybe, from reporters, or maybe less of, in terms of coverage of this legislation, coverage of the protests, and coverage of the real fight that we’re in right now?

    VE: That’s an interesting question. I do think that one thing to keep in mind is that this really is an anti-democratic trend.

    JJ: Right.

    VE: I think there are ways in which it will not be surprising to see who these laws get applied against. But at the same time, at their core, they are taking aim at, where you started, one of our fundamental American rights: the right to protest. And that applies regardless of the message that is being expressed.

    And I think it’s important to keep in mind that this is legislation that will impact people, regardless of what they’re expressing, simply because they are seeking to do what is so deeply American: to join together, and speak out together, and be in the same place with other people who they want to associate with. And I think that that is the thing that legislators should really be ashamed for doing: the idea that they are trying to stop people from exercising one of their fundamental rights.

    JJ: We’ve been speaking with Vera Eidelman, she’s staff attorney with the ACLU’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project. They are online at ACLU.org. Vera Eidelman, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

    VE: Thank you very much for having me.

     

    The post ‘They Are Taking Aim at Our Fundamental American Right to Protest’ appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • RNZ Pacific

    Malaita province in Solomon Islands is planning to poll people on self-determination.

    It comes two weeks after a Malaitan-led protest against the national government in Honiara degenerated into a violent riot.

    The Malaita Premier, Daniel Suidani, said he was seeking the help of the United Nations in the referendum, which he hoped to have completed by the end of January.

    Suidani said the UN was involved in drawing up the Townsville Peace Agreement in 2000, which was an attempt to resolve prolonged ethnic violence on Guadalcanal.

    He said nothing had come from that agreement’s commitment to self-determination.

    “The issue of independence or maybe a referendum is quite important because we need to find out whether that idea is still in the minds of the people of Malaita. That is why I am announcing this referendum to be carried out as soon as possible,” he said.

    Earlier this week, Solomon Islands Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare defeated a motion of no confidence in him by 32 votes to 15 with two abstentions.

    It was moved by opposition leader Matthew Wale after major political unrest in the capital last month saw three days of rioting, looting and burning of businesses and properties in Honiara.

    Sogavare said he would defend the principles of democracy and the rule of law no matter the cost.

    In his first public statement since the vote, Sogavare said the Solomon Islands was a democratic country with a democratically-elected government and he did not resign because that would only bring the wrong message to future generations.

    Where is the legislation?
    The government is also being criticised for only passing one new law this year.

    Opposition MP and member for East ‘Are’are Peter Kenilorea Jr said the only law the government had passed in Parliament this year was an amendment to the Telecommunications Act.

    He said the government could not use the covid-19 pandemic as an excuse for not doing its job.

    “Just this year Fiji passed 34 Acts. They had community transmission. They worked,” he said.

    “Papua New Guinea had 15, and 43 last year. We cannot just leave our jobs just because of covid-19. We don’t even have community transmission.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • After 30 years in exile, it’s easy to doubt that it will ever be safe to live and work in Sudan. But the action being taken by young people shows democracy will rise again

    “All the goodness and the heroisms will rise up again, then be cut down again and rise up,” John Steinbeck wrote to a friend in 1941, just before the US entered the second world war. “It isn’t that the evil thing wins – it never will – but that it doesn’t die.”

    Growing up, I was always interested in politics, politics was the reason I had to leave Sudan at the age of 11. At school, we weren’t allowed to study or discuss it, and it was the same at home.For years, I lay in bed and listened to my father and his friends as they argued about politics and sang traditional songs during their weekend whisky rituals. They watched a new Arabic news channel, Al Jazeera, which aired from Qatar. All the journalism my father consumed about Sudan was from the London-based weekly opposition newspaper, Al Khartoum. The only time he turned on our dial-up internet was to visit Sudanese Online.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • RNZ Pacific

    The Solomon Islands prime minister came in for searing criticism when he faced a confidence vote in Parliament today.

    A motion of no confidence against Manasseh Sogavare was debated amid tight security in the capital Honiara, where hundreds of regional security forces have deployed following major political unrest less than two weeks ago.

    About 250 defence force and police personnel from Australia, Papua New Guinea, Fiji and New Zealand were on high alert in anticipation of potential unrest around the outcome of the vote.

    As expected, the pro-China prime minister survived the no confidence vote with the support of 32 MPs, while 15 voted against him.

    Local media reported that numerous local families departed from Honiara aboard interisland ferries to return to home villages to avoid potential unrest in the capital, where many shops and schools had also closed.

    The motion was tabled by opposition leader Matthew Wale, who has accused Sogavare of allowing corruption to fester, and of treating the people of Malaita province with contempt.

    Malaitans played a central role in the late November protest that sparked the unrest, which left extensive destruction in Honiara, prompting Sogavare’s request for regional security help.

    Suidani denies instigation claims
    Malaita’s provincial Premier Daniel Suidani, whose administration has fallen out with the national government, especially over the country’s move to switch diplomatic ties from Taiwan to China, has denied claims by the coalition that he instigated the unrest.

    Wale told Parliament that the actions of the rioters should not obscure the real issue behind the unrest.

    “We must condemn all the criminality in the strongest terms, but it pales, Mr Speaker, in comparison to the looting happening at the top,” he said.

    Speaking in favour of the motion, former prime minister Rick Hounipwela described Sogavare as the ultimate opportunist whose accession to prime minister over four stints “has always been under abnormal circumstances”.

    Blaming the prime minister for negligent management of the country’s finances, Hounipwela said the country’s corruption problem had deepened under Sogavare’s rule.

    “We’ve experienced huge tax exemptions worth millions of dollars given to the people who least needed it, usually the loggers and mining operators.”

    Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare
    Prime Minister Manasseh Sogavare speaking in Parliament today … “When we are under attack from forces of evil, we must stand up for what is right.” Image: APR screenshot

    In today’s debate on the motion, Sogavare said the motion had been filed against the backdrop of an illegal attempted coup.

    ‘Stand up to tyranny’
    “When we are under attack from forces of evil, we must stand up for what is right, we must stand up to this tyranny. We cannot entertain violence being used to tear down a democratically elected government.”

    Sogavare rejected the opposition’s accusation of corruption against him.

    Hounipwela, the MP for Small Malaita, accused the prime minister of using the pandemic State of Emergency to give himself authoritarian powers.

    He also claimed Sogavare had used police to repress public criticism of his leadership, and of directing foreign embassies and high commissions in the country to notify the government of their moves around the provinces.

    “To vote against [the motion], members would be aiding and abetting his zeal for power and to rule this country with an iron fist. That’s what we see as a track record,” Hounipwela said.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • RNZ News

    An anti-vax protest that shut down the centre of Newmarket in New Zealand’s largest city Auckland today may have cost local businesses hundreds of thousands of dollars in lost customers, says the local business association.

    Hundreds gathered at 11am at the Auckland Domain before heading to Westfield Newmarket shopping mall via Carlton Gore Road and Broadway.

    After gathering outside the mall, they then moved towards Government House in Epsom.

    Newmarket Business Association head Mark Knoff-Thomas said the local stores were “very disappointed” by the behaviour of the protesters.

    “We all accept that everyone has got the right to protest, but not when your protest ends up bringing a town centre to a standstill, where retailers and hospitality providers have to shut their doors just to be safe because there’s so many people storming down the street,” he said.

    “I think it is shameless behaviour and very, very misguided.”

    He said stores had high expectations for the day which had been shattered – the second day of Auckland opening up under red alert under the new traffic lights covid-19 system after almost four months in lockdown.

    ‘People got fed up’
    “This should have been one of the best Saturdays of the year for us and the protesters certainly put paid to that because after they moved through Broadway, everybody left because traffic was snarled up and people got fed up and went home.

    “It potentially lost Newmarket many hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    “I hope the protesters never come back to Newmarket ever again. If they want to protest, by all means do it somewhere where it doesn’t impact on business owners because it’s been one of the worst years for business people. Very stressful.

    “A lot of people are financially on the ropes and all the protesters have done today is add more stress to those people.”

    Earlier, Inspector Beth Houliston of Auckland police said officers were “closely monitoring” the protest activity.

    “Our focus remains balancing the safety of all protesters and the public, with the right to peacefully protest.”

    Traffic disrupted
    Houliston said traffic in the area had been disrupted by the protesters.

    “We would like to thank members of the public who have deferred their travel today.

    “We also acknowledge those that have been inconvenienced.

    “Police will follow-up any incidents of offending or concern identified during the protest activity.”

    The protest organisers were calling the rally ‘the Mass Exodus’.

    Protest in New Plymouth
    Meanwhile, anti-vaccination protesters have again taken to the streets of New Plymouth.

    About 200 protesters gathered at Puke Ariki before marching up Devon Street, the city’s main shopping area.

    They chanted ‘freedom’ and carried placards calling on the government to end the vaccine mandate.

    Many waved flags including campaign banners for former US president Donald Trump and the tino rangatiratanga or Māori flag, and the United Tribes of NZ flag.

    About 200 anti-vaxxer protesters march in New Plymouth on 4 December 2021
    About 200 protesters marched up Devon Street in New Plymouth today, calling on the government to end the vaccine mandate. Image: Robin Martin/RNZ

    Some of Auckland’s strict lockdown rules were eased yesterday, as the country moved to the new traffic light Covid-19 protection framework.

    Police say fewer people converged on central Auckland last night compared to pre-covid-19 times.

    But officers were kept busy dealing with disorder-related incidents, involving highly intoxicated people.

    In one case, a person is in a serious condition after being assaulted on Karangahape Road.

    A 22-year-old man has been charged with wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

    He was due to appear in the Auckland District Court today.

    98 new community cases
    The Ministry of Health reported 98 new community cases of covid-19 in New Zealand today, with cases in Auckland, Northland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Hawke’s Bay, Nelson Tasman and Canterbury.

    In a statement, the ministry said there were 73 cases in hospital, including seven people in intensive care.

    Today’s cases include three in Northland, 64 in Auckland, 21 in Waikato, six in the Bay of Plenty, one in Mangakino, two in Hawke’s Bay and one in Nelson Marlborough.

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Dhias Suwandi in Jayapura

    Eight youths have been declared suspects on charges of makar (treason, subversion, rebellion) for flying the banned Papuan independence flag Morning Star at the Cenderawasih Sports Centre in the capital Jayapura this week on December 1.

    The Morning Star is a symbol used as a flag by the Free Papua Organisation (OPM) and by most civil society organisations.

    They have been identified by their initials MSY, YM, MY, MK, BM, FK, MP and MW — most of them university students.

    Flag-raising protests across the world were staged in solidarity with West Papuan calls for self-determination.

    The flag-raising commemorations marked the 60th anniversary of West Papua’s declaration of independence from Dutch colonial rule in 1961.

    The Cenderawasih Sports Centre flag-raising incident took place on Wednesday afternoon. Prior to holding the action, on November 30, the eight youths held a meeting in the vicinity of Asmara Maro, claimed police reports.

    The meeting was allegedly chaired by MY alias M who acted as the leader of the action and the flag raiser. MY also made the flag and the banner later carried by the suspects.

    Parliamentary march planned
    After flying the flag above the Cendrawasih Sports Centre (GOR), the youths had planned to march to the Papua Regional House of Representatives (DPRD).

    The banned Morning Star flag flies above Cenderawasih Sports Centre
    The banned Morning Star flag flies above Cenderawasih Sports Centre building in Jayapura, Papua, on “independence day” December 1. Image: Antara News

    Papua regional police public relations division head Senior Commissioner AM Kamal explained that seven of the youths were tasked with flying the flag and marching towards the Papua regional police headquarters (Mapolda) while carrying a banner with the Morning Star drawn on it.

    The eighth person meanwhile was tasked with documenting the action and spreading it on social media.

    The eight have been charged under Article 106 of the Criminal Code (KUHP) in conjunction with Article 110 of the KUHP in conjunction with Article 87 of the KUHP on “plotting to commit crimes against state security”.

    “Currently the eight suspects are being held at the Papua Mapolda detention centre for further legal processing,” said Kamal.

    Amnesty International criticism
    On Friday, Amnesty International criticised the arrests, among 34 detentions this week of Papuan protesters, as well as 19 injuries sustained at demonstrations elsewhere in Indonesia.

    “No one should be detained simply for peacefully expressing their political opinions,” said Amnesty’s Indonesia director Usman Hamid, news agency reports said.

    Police did not immediately respond to media requests for comment on Amnesty’s statement.

    In June 2020, Indonesia sentenced to prison seven Papuans for treason, while Papuan independence figure Filep Karma spent 11 years in prison after raising the banned flag publicly. He was released in 2015.

    In Ambon, Maluku, Beritabeta reports that a demonstration by scores of Papuan students marking Independence Day ended in chaos after it was forcibly broken up by police.

    The Papuan students, who are undergoing their studies in Ambon, refused to accept the police actions and fought back.

    The police finally succeeded in forcing the demonstrators back, who were wearing clothing and accessories with the Morning Star flag on them.

    Ambon and the Ambon islands municipal police public relations division head, Second Police Inspector Izaac Leatemia, told journalists that the demonstration was broken up because the protesters did not have a permit from police.

    Attacked by vigilantes
    In the Balinese provincial capital of Denpasar, a protest by the Bali City Committee Papua Student Alliance (AMP-KKB) and the Indonesian People’s Front for West Papua (FRI-WP) ended in a clash with a vigilante group called the Nusantara Garuda Patriots (PGN), reports Detik.com.

    The AMP-KKB said that 12 of its members were injured during the clash.

    “Based on our data from the AMP there were 12 of our comrades (who suffered injuries). Some were kicked by the PGN, and then there were comrades who were hit by rocks,”, said AMP-KKB chairperson Yesaya Gobay.

    Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was “Kibarkan Bendera Bintang Kejora di Sebelah Polda Papua, 8 Pemuda di Jayapura Jadi Tersangka Makar”.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  •  

    Washington Post depiction of the January 6 Insurrection

    Washington Post (10/31/21)

    This week on CounterSpin, two archival interviews: As the year nears its end, it’s hard not to think back to how it started—with the violent assault on the Capitol by a crowd intent on preventing the declaration of Joe Biden as president. We spoke with organizer and strategist Dorothee Benz the next day about the import of the events of January 6.

          CounterSpin211203Benz.mp3

     

    Deadly Charlottesville car attack

    ABC News (8/13/17)

    Also on the show: While response to the insurrection came slowly, states have been cracking down on peaceful protests. We talked about that worrying trend with the ACLU’s Vera Eidelman around the Fourth of July.

          CounterSpin211203Eidelman.mp3

    The post Dorothee Benz on January 6 Insurrection, Vera Eidelman on Anti-Protest Laws appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • On 1 December, higher education staff and University and College Union (UCU) members launched their first of three days of strike action against pension cuts, racial, gender and disability pay gaps, low wages, unpaid hours, and excessive workloads. University staff across the UK have taken to picket lines – and social media – to demand that university bosses take action to challenge poor wages and entrenched exploitation and inequality in the higher education sector.

    Unjust pensions, pay and conditions

    According to the union, “UCU members are taking action over falling pay, the gender and ethnic pay gap, precarious employment practices, and unsafe workloads”. Since 2009, university staff have seen real terms pay cuts of nearly 20%. And cuts proposed by Universities UK (UUK) will see the average pension drop by around 36% (despite claiming that the proposed cuts would lead to 10% to 18% drop).

    The casualisation of work in higher education means that today, nearly 90,000 university staff are employed on insecure contracts. Reflecting the limited rights, protections and security such arrangements provide, University of Bristol researcher Dr Eleanor Johnson shared:

    And Dr Eve Hayes said:

    Striking staff are also challenging excessive workloads in higher education. According to an Education Support report, excessive workloads and unpaid hours are causing a mental health crisis among higher education workers. The report found that 79% of respondents struggled with an intense, excessive workload. It also found that over half of respondents displayed signs of depression.

    Speaking to the entrenched exploitation of higher education workers, University of St Andrews lecturer Roxani Krystalli shared:

    University staff are also taking industrial action to challenge unjust pay gaps. As it stands, the pay gap between Black and white higher education staff is currently 17%. The average gender pay gap is 15.1%. And the disability pay gap is at 9%. A UCU survey found that marginalised university staff are disproportionately impacted by excessive workloads and insecure contracts.

    Contextualising racial and gender pay gaps in the sector, King’s College’s UCU shared: 

    Higher education staff unite

    Announcing the first day of industrial action, the UCU tweeted:

    Striking staff are demanding the reversal of pension cuts, and a £2.5k rise in pay for all staff. They are also demanding “action to tackle unmanageable workloads, pay inequality and insecure contracts”.

    Threatening further industrial action if university bosses fail to meet these demands, UCU general secretary Jo Grady said:

    If they continue to ignore the modest demands of staff then we will be forced to take further industrial action in the new year, which even more branches will join.

    On 1 December, approximately 50,000 staff from 58 higher education institutions took to picket lines nationwide to demand fair pensions, pay and conditions.

    Striking staff took to social media to share pictures from picket lines up and down the country. The University of York’s UCU shared:

    And Leeds Student Staff Solidarity tweeted:

    Highlighting that the marketisation of the UK’s higher education system impacts all workers in the sector, UCU posted:

    And striking staff at universities including the London School of Economics (LSE) held teach-ins:

    Solidarity with striking higher education workers

    An overwhelming number of students have met the industrial action with outpourings of support and solidarity for striking university staff. Indeed, according to the National Union of Students (NUS), 73% of students support industrial action. On 1 December, students took to picket lines across the country to express solidarity with striking higher education workers. NUS president Larissa Kennedy tweeted:

    Student activists from the Red Square Movement came together to block UUK’s head office in solidarity with striking higher education workers:

    Students occupied the University of Manchester’s business school to support the ongoing strike. One student posted:

    And over 330 Birbeck University students have signed an open letter to senior leadership, stating “we will continue to support staff as they fight for better working conditions – their working conditions are our learning conditions”:

    Meanwhile, the University of Sussex Students’ Union has organised a march and rally in solidarity with local striking staff:

    Join the movement

    The strike action is due to continue until Friday 3 December. In the meantime, UCU is urging supporters to join their local picket line to support striking higher education staff. The union has shared a list of all institutions taking part in the industrial action. UCU is leading a march and rally in London on 3 December. The union is encouraging anyone who can’t make it to the picket lines to express solidarity on social media, and to donate to UCU’s strike fund. It is vital that we – particularly those of us who are students – unite in solidarity with striking university staff and against the marketisation of higher education.

    Featured image via Twitter Screengrab – @UM_UCU

    By Sophia Purdy-Moore

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  •  

    The not guilty verdict on November 19 in the Kyle Rittenhouse case gave corporate media the opportunity to take a measured approach to systemic violence in the US—and for the most part, they fell short.

    The jury’s finding came after more than a year of a political back and forth over the killing of two protesters and the wounding of a third during a Black Lives Matter uprising in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 25, 2020.

    The trial was marked by early allegations of witness tampering and Judge Bruce Schroeder constantly interfering in the case on Rittenhouse’s behalf, including barring prosecutors from bringing up the defendant’s meetings with members of the Proud Boys and a previous fight he had been in. Though those points were raised in some media during the case, they were largely dismissed in the wake of the verdict, or portrayed as incidental to the system working. Rather, the jury’s decision was framed as a verdict that upheld the right to self defense, never mind the fact that that right tends to appear and disappear depending on whose self is in danger.

    ‘Justice was done’

    CNN: Sears on Rittenhouse verdict: 'It's time to move on' and 'heal'

    Virginia Lt. Gov.-elect Winsome Sears (right) told Dana Bash (CNN, 11/21/21), “We ought to let the American justice system speak for itself.”

    Measured, respectable right-wing voices framed the Rittenhouse decision as the result of a criminal justice system that came to the right conclusion—while feeding into the idea that the shootings were so clearly justified they made any charges a farce.

    “Justice was done in that and the jury system works,” Former Republican New Jersey Governor Chris Christie told Bret Baier on Fox News Sunday (11/21/21). “You know, I was a prosecutor for seven years, and those charges should never have been brought.”

    NBC’s Meet the Press’s Twitter account (11/21/21), meanwhile, framed the verdict as part of a legal system working to uphold a very specific principle of self defense:

    Kelly O’Donnell, Kristen Soltis Anderson, David Henderson and Rev. Al Sharpton join the Meet the Press roundtable to talk about the Rittenhouse verdict as “stand your ground” wins a victory in Rittenhouse trial.

    On CNN (11/21/21), Republican Virginia Lieutenant Governor-elect Winsome Sears told host Dana Bash that “we ought to let the American justice system speak for itself.” ABC reporter Terry Moran (11/21/21) told that network’s Martha Raddatz that Rittenhouse had “won this case on the witness stand,” because his defense lawyer prepared a line of questioning “structured right at the Wisconsin law of self-defense”—presenting the case and the lives lost as simply part of a hard fought, but abstract, debate.

    “It was not a crusade in that courtroom,” Moran added in a somberly approving tone. “​​It was a trial.”

    Persistent grievances

    Fox: Everything We Heard About Rittenhouse Was a Lie

    “What a sweet boy,” Tucker Carlson (Fox, 11/22/21) said of Rittenhouse.

    At Fox News, Tucker Carlson (11/22/21) aired an exclusive interview with Rittenhouse, and his Fox Nation show tailed the defendant through the court proceedings, enjoying unparalleled access.

    Though many in right-wing media delighted in the verdict, they still found grievances to air. Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) termed the disapproval expressed by President Joe Biden over the verdict an example of “cancel culture” in an appearance on Justice With Judge Jeanine (11/20/21).

    Friday on Fox (11/19/21), Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro raised the possibility Rittenhouse could sue Biden for “defamation” over a September 30, 2020, tweet from last year (9/30/20) suggesting the shooter was a white supremacist.

    Geraldo Rivera disagreed about Biden’s liability, but paired it with an admission that in his view, Rittenhouse had a “clear-cut case of self-defense.” The media narrative on Fox is clear: The jury’s finding cannot be questioned in this case, and the validity of the Rittenhouse defense is an established fact.

    ‘Anger at the vipers’

    USA Today: From Kenosha riots to Kyle Rittenhouse trial, biased media coverage makes everyone angrier

    USA Today legal analyst Jonathan Turley (11/19/21) complained, “Many viewers may not have learned that Rittenhouse spent his time cleaning graffiti off the high school.”

    Elsewhere, conservative and right-leaning pundits turned their attention to the rest of the media and other perceived political enemies for their alleged roles in perpetuating a false narrative. The not guilty verdict conclusively debunked, in the view of conservative media, the supposedly widespread assumption by centrist media that Rittenhouse acted out of racial animus and in service of right-wing politics.

    In an opinion piece for USA Today (11/19/21), legal analyst Jonathan Turley called the reporting on the trial and Rittenhouse himself the result of “passion” overwhelming clear-eyed reasoning, and fretted that there would be more “misinformation” spread as political polarization continues.

    “The growing disconnect between actual crimes and their coverage is unlikely to change in our age of rage,” Turley wrote. “Rittenhouse had to be convicted to fulfill the narrative, and any acquittal had to be evidence of a racist jury picked to carry out racist justice.”

    Megyn Kelly, the former Fox and NBC star who now hosts a show on SiriusXM, tweeted that she had “relief for Kyle, yes, but also anger at the vipers who did this to him” in the minutes following the verdict while she was on air.

    ‘Deceitful and morally repugnant’

    TK News: The Rittenhouse Verdict is Only Shocking if You Followed the Last Year of Terrible Reporting

    Matt Taibbi (TK News, 11/19/21) decried “a year of pronouncing the ‘Kenosha shooter’ a murderer”—but failed to quote any journalists doing so.

    Substack bloggers got in on the attacks on media coverage as well. Hours after the trial ended, Glenn Greenwald wrote (11/19/21) wrote:

    I went live on Rumble to provide my views of why, after having watched the entire trial, I believed this verdict was just, and why the media narrative was particularly deceitful and morally repellent.

    Matt Taibbi (11/19/21) wrote:

    In a tinderbox situation like this one, it was reckless beyond belief for analysts to tell audiences Rittenhouse was a murderer, when many if not most of them had a good idea he would be acquitted. But that’s exactly what most outlets did.

    (Taibbi did not cite any examples of “analysts” at  “most outlets” who “[told] audiences Rittenhouse was a murderer.”)

    And Bari Weiss took the opportunity afforded by the not guilty verdict to reup her article from earlier in the week (11/17/21), which claimed the American people were “served a pack of lies about what happened during those terrible days in Kenosha”—unless, of course, they had listened to her fellow conservatives Jacob Siegel (Tablet, 8/24/20) and Jesse Singal (Substack, 11/10/21), who cast doubt on the official narrative in favor of Rittenhouse from the beginning.

    ‘This trial was a warning shot’

    AP: Rittenhouse acquittal tightens the political vise for Biden

    AP (11/21/21): “A difficult political atmosphere for President Joe Biden may have become even more treacherous with the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse.”

    More centrist networks did not ignore the role of race in the trial. On ABC’s This Week (11/21/21), attorney Channa Lloyd told Raddatz that if Rittenhouse had been Black, he likely would have faced a different outcome for killing two and wounding another. “Had Rittenhouse been an African-American young man…would the verdict have been the same?” Lloyd said. “Statistically, what we find is that it would not be.”

    On CBS’s Face the Nation (11/21/21), NAACP president and CEO Derrick Johnson said that it was hard to reconcile the experience of Black Americans in the US criminal justice system with the treatment received by Rittenhouse. “This trial was a warning shot,” he added, telling host Margaret Brennan that the verdict opened the door for more right-wing “vigilante justice.”

    Still, corporate media couldn’t help but turn the verdict into horse race coverage. The Associated Press (11/21/21), in an article Saturday headlined “Rittenhouse Acquittal Tightens the Political Vise for Biden,” warned that Biden and the Democrats could face political fallout from their comments about the trial.

    “The verdict in the case comes at a moment when Biden is trying to keep fellow Democrats focused on passing his massive social services and climate bill and hoping to turn the tide with Americans who have soured on his performance as president,” according to AP.

    It’s a message that’s unlikely to resonate with the victims, the killer or their respective supporters—and in that respect, it’s something of a centrist success.

    The post Corporate Media Celebrate Criminal Justice System—While Differing on Outcomes appeared first on FAIR.


    This content originally appeared on FAIR and was authored by Eoin Higgins.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • An Insulate Britain protester who has been on hunger strike in prison for 13 days is being given hospital treatment, the campaign group said.

    Emma Smart was moved to the hospital wing at HMP Bronzefield in Ashford, Surrey, on Friday.

    She was jailed for four months on 17 November for breaching an injunction and immediately vowed to stop eating until the government moves to insulate homes.

    Hunger strike

    In a statement released by Insulate Britain, Smart said:

    The window of my cell in the hospital wing is blocked up and there is little natural light, in my previous cell I could see the birds and trees that line the prison fence.

    I have less time to go outside in the prison yard for exercise now.

    All of this is testing my resolve to continue, but I feel that not eating is the only thing I can do from prison to draw attention to those who will have to make the choice between heating and eating this winter.

    Insulate Britain members, including Smart’s husband Andy Smith, are to stage a 24-hour fast outside 10 Downing Street on Tuesday morning in solidarity with her, the group said.

    More protesters facing jail

    Smart is one of nine members of the group jailed for breaching an injunction designed to prevent the road blockades which have sparked anger among motorists and others affected by the protests.

    They appeared at the High Court on 17 November after they admitted breaching an injunction by taking part in a blockade at junction 25 of the M25 during the morning rush hour on October 8.

    Insulate Britain protests
    Insulate Britain activists including Emma Smart (back centre)

    They received sentences of between three and six months and ordered to pay £5,000 in costs each.

    A further nine Insulate Britain protesters are to appear at the High Court on 14 December to face a charge of contempt of court.

    Insulate Britain began a wave of protests in September and supporters have blocked the M25, roads in London including around Parliament, roads in Birmingham and Manchester and around the Port of Dover in Kent.

    The group is demanding that the government insulate Britain’s “leaky homes” and end deaths it says are caused by winter fuel shortages.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • NGOs believe raids, officially part of an embezzlement inquiry, are an attempt to ‘criminalise social movements’

    Rights activists in El Salvador said they will not be pressured into silence after prosecutors raided the offices of seven charities and groups in the Central American country.

    “They’re trying to criminalise social movements,” said Morena Herrera, a prominent women’s rights activist. “They can’t accept that they are in support of a better El Salvador.”

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • Indigenous land defenders were in a British Columbia court Monday after they were arrested during police raids that took place on Wet’suwet’en territory Friday. During the raids, Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) arrested 29 people, including Wet’suwet’en and Haudenosaunee land defenders, two people described as elders, two photojournalists and a supporting chief from the Gidimt’en clan.

    Those arrests, part of an ongoing, government-sanctioned effort to enable the construction of a proposed pipeline on unceded Wet’suwet’en territory, have essentially cleared the way for the project to proceed unhindered.

    In recent weeks, tensions have escalated in the years-long conflict surrounding the Coastal GasLink (CGL) pipeline, which is being built on the Wet’suwet’en yintah, or territory. The Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs — who represent a traditional government that has been recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada — oppose the project and have made repeated efforts to evict the company, TC Energy, and its subcontractors from the territory.

    On November 14, after CGL ignored an order from the Gidimt’en clan to leave the territory, land defenders used a CGL construction vehicle to demolish a segment of road leading to remote man camps used to house hundreds of construction workers. The RCMP responded by sending dozens of officers from outside the area who raided multiple encampments at the end of last week after establishing an “exclusion zone” — an area that has been off limits to Wet’suwet’en and non-Wet’suwet’en people, including journalists, since last week’s raids began.

    In a press release, Jennifer Wickham, the media coordinator for the Gidimt’en camp, said CGL is seeking conditions that would bar Sleydo’ — a supporting chief from Gidimt’en clan and a prominent leader of the counter-pipeline movement who was arrested Friday — from returning to her home on Wet’suwet’en territory where she lives with her three children and her husband, a Haida man who was also arrested last week, despite not being actively involved in the recent blockades.

    Wickham said CGL also challenged the First Nation status of Sleydo’ and another Wet’suwet’en woman, a legal strategy designed to keep land defenders out of the area that Wickham called “completely racist and sexist” in a statement. “Allowing a private corporation to determine two Indigenous womens’ identities and allowing this corporation to deny our inherent rights to be Wet’suwet’en on our territory is a very dangerous precedent,” Wickham added.

    Indigenous-rights advocates have condemned the RCMP’s history of enforcing injunctions against Indigenous land defenders on behalf of companies in resource-extractive industries.

    “By dragging us through court and using injunctions against us, our Indigenous rights are being violated and are being given less consideration than climate-destroying corporations,” said Grand Chief Stewart Phillip (Penticton Indian Band), president of the Union of British Columbia Indian Chiefs, in a statement.

    According to the RCMP, the Indigenous-led blockades “jeopardized the safety and wellness” of construction workers who were housed at the man camps, forcing the agency to mobilize what it dubbed a “rescue mission” in a press release.

    “RCMP should be assisting flood victims and communities, not out invading our Territory and arresting our peaceful people and supporters,” read a statement from the Wet’suwet’en hereditary chiefs, who referenced the devastating floods that washed through British Columbia last week.

    On November 14, land defenders gave the company eight hours, plus a two-hour extension, to vacate the area. Reports suggest that the company chose not to inform construction workers that the hereditary chiefs had ordered all workers to leave.As news of the raids spread, protests and transportation blockades sprung up throughout Canada. An Indigenous-led demonstration blocked a railway in Toronto for three hours Sunday, days after a highway in Caledonia, Ontario was blocked by protestors standing in solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en land defenders.

    As of Monday evening, multiple people had been released from custody, including Sleydo”s husband, Cody Merriman, and photojournalists Amber Bracken and Michael Toledano.

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Land defenders appear in court after police raids in Wet’suwet’en territory on Nov 23, 2021.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • Green experts and human rights activists are concerned the hardline Cairo regime will suppress any civil society action

    Concern is growing over plans to host a UN climate conference in Sharm el-Sheikh next year, in what will be a crucial summit if the world is to limit global heating to 1.5C.

    Several green experts and human rights activists have told the Observer they fear the ability of civil society groups to protest at the summit will be curtailed by Egypt’s authoritarian regime, reducing the pressure that can be brought to bear on leaders and ministers from the nearly 200 countries expected to take part.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • A roundup of the struggle for human rights and freedoms, from Pakistan to Poland

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • It’s strange that a bill that would actually improve accountability in Victoria is being met by protests

    Australians have shown themselves ready to accept radical encroachments upon their civil liberties for the sake of public health. This is in one sense laudable but in another, disturbing. It is laudable in that it displays a community-mindedness where the end goal is the common good. People have been prepared to accept restrictions on their freedoms as long as the measures are reasonably necessary to protect them and their loved ones from disease and death. There has been a social compact – people are happy enough to accept restrictions, as long as they don’t outlast the crisis.

    We have seen serious erosions of human rights and freedoms in this nation before, yet these have not been wound back once the crisis had passed. And this has happened without so much as a whimper from the public. Before 9/11, Australia had no anti-terrorism laws. Post 9/11, our governments enacted 92 pieces of legislation with unheard-of measures turning age-old principles of criminal justice on their heads. No longer was the commission of a crime a prerequisite for being imprisoned. Instead, you could be imprisoned for something you might do in the future. All of these measures had sunset clauses but night has fallen on none of them.

    Continue reading…

    This post was originally published on Human rights | The Guardian.

  • The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill – known as the policing bill – was already a vicious, repressive and racist piece of legislation. It sparked massive protests across the country, including the uprisings in Bristol that have led to 42 people facing serious charges.

    As The Canary reported in October, home secretary Priti Patel announced plans at the Conservative party conference to make the bill even worse. This included measures to increase the penalty for highway obstruction from a fine to up to six months imprisonment.

    Now amendments to the bill, currently in the House of Lords, have been published. And worryingly these amendments seem to go even further than the fascistic proposals Patel first announced. There are even provisions to ban internet use for some protesters.

    Want to protest? Go straight to jail

    While amendments to bills in the Lords can be ten a penny, these are from baroness Williams of Trafford. Williams is one of the sponsors of the bill and a Home Office minister – so these amendments are therefore likely to make it through to the legislation.

    The six months in jail for highway obstruction have been increased to 51 weeks. And there are also proposals for a new offence of “locking on” and “being equipped for locking on”. ‘Locking on’ is when protesters attach themselves to an object or each other to make it difficult for the police to move them. Again, this will be punishable by up to 51 weeks in prison. If this wasn’t bad enough, there are also proposals for a new stop and search power for anything to lock on with. Even more worryingly, there are provisions for this search power to be used without suspicion. This means the cops can just stop and search anyone they believe might be associated with a protest without needing a reasonable suspicion that they’ve done, or intend to do, anything illegal.

    Yet further powers, presumably aimed at people like the HS2 protesters who have dared to challenge the government’s building of an ecologically destructive and costly train line, criminalise anyone who obstructs “major transport works”. And again, dare to sit in front of bulldozer ripping down a tree for a new road, and you could face up to a 51 weeks in prison.

    I could have spent decades in prison for the crime of protesting

    I’m an activist as well as a journalist. As I’ve previously written, there are times when there’s a need to leave my press badge at home and take action. Over the last 25 years, amongst other things, I’ve obstructed countless roads, blocked trains carrying delegates to an arms fair, and locked on to various objects outside military bases. Altogether, if the policing bill had been enacted, I could have spent decades in prison for the crime of protesting.

    But where this legislation fails in its purpose is that it also wouldn’t have made a difference to the actions that I took and am prepared to take in the future. As I wrote after I was arrested at protests against the London arms fair when my child was six:

    What right do I have to say fuck you to those mothers? The mothers who have just seen their beautiful toddlers blown to pieces by a British made bomb. Do I say sorry love, but I’ve got a kid now, or do I extend my solidarity to mothers everywhere? Do I evaluate the risks I am taking as being petty compared to what other mothers face on a daily basis? Do I do everything I can to fight the companies and individuals who make money selling these bombs?

    I’ve always known I could be arrested and face jail time for the actions that I’ve taken. But although I’ve tried to avoid it, albeit unsuccessfully at times, the threat of prison hasn’t stopped me taking action. Because when you’re trying to stop the arms trade, or the climate crisis, for example, the risk of not taking action is too great. In other words, more people might get locked up, but it won’t stop people taking action. The threat of prison hasn’t, for example, stopped the Insulate Britain protesters imprisoned for breaching the injunction against them.

    Protest too much and the state can ban you using the internet

    One of the most worrying powers contained in the amendments are serious disruption prevention orders. These orders can be imposed against people who’ve been convicted of two or more protest-related offences that have caused “serious disruption” to “two or more individuals, or to an organisation”. For organisation, read corporation.

    Under these orders, a person can be required to report somewhere on particular days, presumably to a police station. They can also ban people from going to certain places, associating with named people, or taking part in particular events. They can also prohibit someone using the internet to “facilitate or encourage” someone to commit a “protest-related offence” or to “carry out activities related to a protest that result in, or are likely to result in, serious disruption to two or more individuals, or to an organisation”.

    Put simply, these orders will effectively ban people from organising protests – especially when the threshold of two or more people is so frighteningly low. The orders can last up to two years and, if breached, are punishable by up to 51 weeks in prison.

    Enough is enough!

    We cannot let these amendments go through without challenge. Kill the Bill groups across the country have done amazing work in focusing public attention on the initial bill. We now need to up the game and get people talking again. This is the biggest threat to our civil liberties in generations. It will give the state unprecedented power to lock up and control those who disagree with it. It’s a bill that was already a dictator’s wet dream even before these amendments were added.

    The Labour Party under Keir Starmer will not provide effective opposition. We cannot and should not rely on parliament to protect our rights. It’s down to all of us to show this bill is unworkable and to show that there’s massive public opposition to it being enacted. It’s down to all of us to show we will not be cowed; we will not back down and it will not stop us taking action.

    Our rights were won through disruptive protest. Important issues are highlighted through disruptive protest. Corporations are held to account through disruptive protest. It is part of the fabric of a free and democratic society.

    The time for action is now. If we delay, the harsh reality for many of us is that our political organising will take place behind prison bars. We cannot allow this to happen.

    Featured image via screengrab

    By Emily Apple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • When Chief Dsta’hyl arrived on a Saturday morning in October, the big construction vehicles rumbled back and forth over the cold mud. He watched an excavator dig into the soil, its yellow, hydraulic arm moving against the green backdrop of forests that he has called home all his life.

    The area that was being prepared for construction lies within the territory of the Wet’suwet’en, a First Nation in what is currently called British Columbia, Canada. As a supporting chief from the Likhts’amisyu clan, Dsta’hyl had been tasked with enforcing Wet’suwet’en law in the area.

    The scene he was witnessing — construction crews preparing to build a pipeline through Wet’suwet’en territory, without their consent — represented a blatant violation of those laws. And Dsta’hyl had seen enough. After warning the on-site construction managers that they were trespassing, he arrived the next day and approached a pair of orange-vested security subcontractors employed by TC Energy, the company building the fracked gas pipeline known as Coastal GasLink, or CGL. He notified them that he would be seizing one of their excavators and then stepped onto the hulking vehicle and disabled it by disconnecting its battery and other components. Though he planned to leave the vehicle in place, Dsta’hyl said he wanted to make a statement to the company, which the traditional leaders decided to evict from their territory last year.

    In a video posted on social media, one of the security workers asks Dsta’hyl what he wants from them. He lets out a hardy laugh.

    “For you guys to leave,” he says. 

    In another clip, Dsta’hyl stands on the vehicle as the workers below angle camcorders at him. “You guys are trespassing, and we want to make sure that you guys know that we mean business.”

    The crew members abandoned the area shortly after, driving off in their pickup trucks and construction vehicles — short one large piece of machinery. And while Dsta’hyl had gotten his message across, the asset-seizure was short-lived.

    “In the middle of the night, they stole that one back,” he said.

    Chief Dsta'hyl
    Chief Dsta’hyl disables a Coastal Gaslink bulldozer. Michael Toledano

    That incident was one of the latest standoffs between the Wet’suwet’en and Coastal GasLink over the proposed pipeline, which, if completed, would carry 2 billion cubic feet per day of fracked gas from northeastern B.C. to a proposed processing facility on the Pacific coast. Although the company says it received all necessary permits and approvals to build the pipeline, the hereditary chiefs of the five clans of the Wet’suwet’en First Nation contend that because they never gave the company permission to build on their territory, the construction efforts violate their laws — not to mention Canada’s own laws.

    The tribe organizes itself into five clans, each of which is subdivided into multiple “houses.” The house chiefs oversee specific areas within the tribe’s traditional territory, which encompasses roughly 22,000 square kilometers (8,500 square miles). The hereditary chiefs make decisions that govern their territory.

    “It’s quite an intricate governance system,” Dsta’hyl said, adding that the Wet’suwet’en have been practicing these laws for thousands of years.

    The Wet’suwet’en government was recognized in a 1997 ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada, which held that the First Nation had never given up rights or title to their lands. And, like other First Nations in Canada’s westernmost province, the Wet’suwet’en never signed a treaty with the British Crown nor the Canadian government, meaning their territory is unceded land.

    “They never surrendered or ceded their territory, so what they’re dealing with is this incursion by pipeline companies and police who are basically invading,” said Clifford Atleo (Tsimshian, Nuu-chah-nulth)​​, an assistant professor of resource and environmental management at Simon Fraser University whose work focuses on Indigenous governance.

    “What the Wet’suwet’en are doing is protecting their lands,” Atleo said.

    Using a Coastal GasLink excavator, land defenders seize a minivan to use as a blockade. Michael Toledano

    Fearing the destruction of their territory, as well as harmful impacts to water, wildlife and people, some members of the Wet’suwet’en have taken direct action against a slew of proposed pipelines over the past decade. They have created dozens of checkpoints and blockades to prevent construction crews from accessing Wet’suwet’en lands and significant sites. In 2009, members of the Unist’ot’en clan established a checkpoint near a small bridge that leads onto their territory, which they maintained alongside Indigenous and non-Indigenous allies for more than ten years. Another blockade was later built on the same road in the neighboring Gidimt’en territory, where, in January 2019, a series of police raids drew international media attention.

    Donning tactical gear and armed with military-style rifles, officers stormed the Gidimt’en checkpoint, arresting 14 land defenders as the officers dismantled the camp. Documents obtained by the Guardian suggest that the officers were prepared to use lethal force against Wet’suwet’en land defenders during the raid.

    A year later, the Unist’ot’en camp was raided by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, or RCMP. Several people were arrested in the 2020 raid, during which officers sawed through a wooden barricade with the word “RECONCILIATION” painted on it, clearing the way for CGL crews to build on Wet’suwet’en territory.

    Both incidents sparked renewed controversy regarding the tactics the RCMP employs in suppressing protests, with many critics highlighting the agency’s history of using excessive force against Indigenous land defenders as well as violent, anti-Indigenous sentiments among its ranks. The RCMP asserts that the raids and ongoing patrols in the area are necessary to enforce a court order that prohibits protestors from blocking CGL construction. A provincial court handed down the injunction three years ago, and, in the time since, both the RCMP and the company have used the legal ruling to restrict access to certain areas and to arrest land defenders who stand in the way of the project.

    But Indigenous people have continued to resist the pipeline, using tactics that escalated over the weekend, when members of the Gidimt’en clan demolished a section of road that CGL has used to access Wet’suwet’en territory.

    On Sunday morning, CGL employees and subcontractors were given an immediate evacuation order. “You have eight hours to vacate the territory peacefully,” said Sleydo’, a supporting chief from the Gidimt’en clan, who made the announcement over the radio. “Failure to comply will result in immediate road closure.”

    But land defenders saw little movement along the road — even after the company negotiated for a two-hour extension. When members of the group approached a man camp they had ordered to disband, they discovered construction crews were not preparing to leave, and had positioned multiple construction vehicles and machinery on the road, said Jennifer Wickham, a member of the Gidimt’en clan who serves as media coordinator for the group.

    In response, land defenders seized a CGL excavator and destroyed a segment of the roadway before dropping a crumpled minivan at a bridgehead. Wickham said that, given RCMP’s previous enforcement of injunctions, a police raid may be imminent.

    “We absolutely expect them to do that,” she said. “As far as when, we have no idea.”

    In an email, an RCMP spokesperson said the agency “is aware of the protest actions and we have, and will continue to have, a police presence in [the] area conducting roving patrols. No arrests were made and we continue to monitor the situation.”

    Sleydo’, a supporting chief from the Gidimt’en clan. Michael Toledano

    The hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en say the injunction, RCMP’s enforcement of it, and the project itself represent an affront to First Nations sovereignty, pointing to the 1997 Supreme Court decision as proof that they have the constitutional right to expel CGL from their territory.

    In what is known as the Delgamuukw case, the court confirmed that “Aboriginal title is a right to the land itself” based on occupation of the area and a system of law that predates British and Canadian colonization. The Supreme Court decision left many issues unresolved, though, such as the exact boundaries of the tribe’s traditional territories.

    Despite the house chiefs’ legally recognized authority, the pipeline company never engaged in meaningful consultation with them, Sleydo’ said.

    “They will send information, but they don’t actually give us the opportunity to engage with that information, and when we have responded, they disregard everything we say,” she said. “That’s not consultation and it’s definitely not consent.”

    The company frequently states that it received approval from the Wet’suwet’en because it negotiated an agreement with the tribe’s elected band councils. Imposed by the Canadian government under the Indian Act of 1876, the band-council system was created to facilitate interactions between First Nations and the federal government. The councils are considered the governing bodies for their respective First Nation reserves, and elected representatives from 20 band councils along the pipeline route signed so-called “benefit agreements” with the company to allow construction. Although councils from multiple reserves within Wet’suwet’en territory approved the project, the hereditary chiefs — as representatives of older, traditional styles of government — say they retain authority over their traditional lands, and that CGL needs their permission to access the territory.

    The company claims it has sought numerous meetings with the hereditary chiefs in the past two years, and that it continues to seek input from Wet’suwet’en leaders “with the sincere hope of developing a respectful and constructive relationship as we move to completion of the Project and beyond.” In an email, CGL spokesperson Natasha Westover cited safety concerns as justification for blocking Wet’suwet’en people from their territory.

    “Coastal GasLink has an obligation to facilitate access for [I]ndigenous peoples to their traditional territories, however, that access may be delayed where it is unsafe [to] provide access immediately,” she said. Westover declined to provide an interview with CGL executives or other personnel for this story, despite multiple requests.

    After CGL’s injunction was made permanent last winter the Wet’suwet’en house chiefs unanimously decided to evict the company from its territories.

    Protesters occupy Macmillan Yard
    Hundreds of protesters in Ontario march in solidarity with Wet’suwet’en land defenders after police raids drew international attention in February 2020. Rene Johnston / Toronto Star via Getty Images

    Flowing from a glacier-fed lake, Wedzin Kwa runs through the heart of Wet’suwet’en territory. The river provides important spawning grounds for salmon, and supplies community members with unpolluted drinking water. 

    “You could swim in that lake and just open your mouth and drink the water, it’s so pristine,” Sleydo’ said. “And the river is so clear that you can see these very deep spawning beds that the salmon have been returning to for thousands of years.”

    CGL plans to construct the pipeline beneath the river. In September, when members of the Gidimt’en clan heard that construction crews were preparing to tunnel under Wedzin Kwa, they rushed to occupy the site. They have since erected several structures, including a cabin with a full kitchen and multiple solar-powered “tiny homes.”

    Because the conflicts with RCMP in recent years have escalated in the dead of winter, the Gidim’ten clan has experience erecting blockades in temperatures as low as minus 40 degrees Fahrenheit, and welcomed the chance to set up camp with only a light snow in the ground.

    “Blockade season came early this year,” Sleydo’ said.

    Despite the mounting tensions, Sleydo’ said the members of camp try to remain upbeat, laughing and telling stories around the campfire at night.

    But the mood changes when the RCMP approaches the area. In the days after the outpost was established, RCMP officers tasered a person and injured a man who had locked himself to the underside of a bus. Sleydo’ said officers grabbed the man by the legs and repeatedly lifted his body and slammed him onto the ground as a way of forcing him to unclip himself from the vehicle. She said the RCMP’s use of “pain compliance” equates to torture.

    “That person is still receiving ongoing medical care and has [nerve damage] in his hands,” she said.

    The national police force frequently sends members of a specialized division with a reputation of using excessive force against protestors. Known as the Community-Industry Response Group, or C-IRG, the roving unit draws RCMP officers from far-flung areas of Canada to break up protest camps that form in opposition to pipelines, mining projects and logging operations.

    Officers with the unit have been widely criticized in recent months for their aggressive tactics in breaking up anti-logging protests near Fairy Creek on Vancouver Island. In addition to making violent arrests and showering unarmed protestors with pepper spray, many of the officers removed all forms of identification from their uniforms during multiple raids. British Columbia Supreme Court Justice Douglas W. Thompson condemned those actions in his decision to end an injunction against the Fairy Creek protestors, writing that RCMP’s enforcement tactics “have led to serious and substantial infringement of civil liberties.”

    During RCMP raids on Wet’suwet’en territory, officers often brandish sniper rifles and bring in police dogs to intimidate land defenders, Sleydo’ said. “If we’re trying to defend a space, we’re considered a huge threat,” she said. “And they use that as an excuse to use violence and excessive force against us.”

    The agency’s media relations team did not provide a phone interview despite multiple requests.

    The Bulkley River runs through Wet’suwet’en and Gitxsan territory. The river is partly fed by Wedzin Kwa, a vital waterway in Wet’suwet’en culture. Getty Images

    Miles Howe, an assistant professor of critical criminology at Brock University, said the RCMP often engages in “political policing,” in that the agency targets groups that are considered threats to Canada’s access to natural resources — and, by extension, the economic interests surrounding the extraction of those resources. Howe co-authored a 2019 report that used documents obtained through records requests to show that the RCMP performed extensive surveillance of Indigenous land defenders and assessed the risk posed by protestors not based on criminality, but on their ability to rally public support.

    The RCMP raids in early 2020 sparked nationwide protests in Canada, leading Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to voice tepid support for Wet’suwet’en sovereignty, though he later demanded that the “barricades come down.” Months later, federal and provincial government officials agreed to engage in land-rights negotiations with the hereditary chiefs.

    “So far, nothing has come from that process,” said Jennifer Wickham, who serves as media coordinator for the Gidimt’en resistance group.

    Instead, the Canadian government has subsidized Coastal GasLink and continues to tout the benefits of liquified natural gas as a “transition fuel” that will set Canada on a course to reach its ambitious climate goals. Earlier this month, Trudeau took the stage at the UN climate change conference in Scotland to outline Canada’s plan to cap oil and gas emissions in order to reach net-zero emissions by 2050.

    “That’s no small task for a major oil and gas producing country,” he said.

    But critics say Trudeau’s commitments run counter to his administration’s support of natural gas projects, which have been shown to leak large amounts of methane — a powerful greenhouse gas — into the atmosphere. Given the outsize impacts climate change often has on Native communities, Indigenous rights advocates say it is critical that First Nations are adequately consulted on resource-extractive projects that take place on their ancestral lands.

    In 2014, the UN’s special rapporteur on the rights of Indigenous peoples implored the Canadian government to seek the “free, prior and informed consent” of First Nations in the early stages of a project. The U.N. Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that Natives “have the right to own, use, develop and control the lands, territories and resources that they possess by reason of traditional ownership” and that they “shall not be forcibly removed from their territories.” Earlier this year, legislators passed a bill aimed at implementing UNDRIP into Canadian law.

    And yet, the government is enabling Coastal GasLink to push its pipeline through Wet’suwet’en territory.

    Sleydo’ said the group is “digging in for winter,” and has no intention of allowing the pipeline to cross Wedzin Kwa. The mother of three children said that, although it has been difficult being away from her family during the occupation, she refuses to pass the pipeline’s impacts down to her children.

    “They will not drill under our sacred headwaters because we’re going to defend this space until the end,” she said. “We’re not going anywhere.”

    This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Canada sides with a pipeline, violating Wet’suwet’en laws — and its own on Nov 18, 2021.

    This post was originally published on Grist.

  • A grassroots NHS campaign group will be taking the fight for fair pay and safe staffing right to the heart of Westminster. And, it will be sailing the Thames to raise the alarm over the Tories’ wilful destruction of our health service.

    NHS workers saying ‘enough is enough’

    NHS Workers Say No is a grassroots campaign group:

    It’s been at the forefront of action against the Tory-created NHS crisis this year: from protests outside parliament to huge petitions via campaigning videos. NHS Workers Say No has been unrepentant in its fight for a safe NHS that pays it staff properly and works for everyone. Now, its taking action via the River Thames in London.

    “Sink or swim”

    The group has organised a protest and rally on Friday 26 November with the Thames as its focal point:

    The group said on its Facebook event page:

    AHOY there!

    NHS workers are taking to the river Thames on the 26th of November at 12.30 to show this government that we outright reject the 3% pay offer.

    Frontline NHS workers have hired a boat to take us as close to the house of commons as possible. We will be making our voices heard using our on board PA system, megaphones, and using banners/placards.

    Then, there’ll be a protest and banner drop on Westminster bridge. Finally, NHS Workers Say No and its supporters will march to Old Palace Yard, opposite Parliament, for a rally. Guest speakers will address the crowds. You can get involved online. On the day, use the #NHSSOS #NHSPay15 hashtags on Twitter.

    Given the year the NHS has had, it’s little wonder NHS Workers Say No feel the need to protest.

    Running the NHS into the ground

    The dire government pay rise of 3% for NHS staff has caused anger among workers and unions. Waiting lists are at record highs. And some of the corporate media are actively briefing against our NHS workers.

    Meanwhile, the Tories are pushing their health and care bill through parliament. Campaign groups like Keep Our NHS Public have been saying it will lead to further privatisation. You can join a protest about the bill at 5pm at Parliament on Monday 22 November.

    But crucially, winter is coming. A&E and paramedics are already struggling under the strain due to the lack of beds:

    With nearly 100,000 staff vacancies in England alone, the combined pressure of both coronavirus and flu cases – and, crucially, NHS workers’ wellbeing hitting rock bottom – the Tories have created a perfect storm for the health service. Now, already-exhausted frontline staff are having to fight back. So, it’s up to all of us to support them.

    Featured image via Tom Arthur – Wikimedia and Good Morning Britain – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on The Canary.

  • Activists from around the world have taken to the stage at COP26 for a “People’s Plenary” session.

    The COP26 Coalition organised the event on Friday, with one of the UN climate conference’s halls filled with hundreds of representatives from civil society groups.

    The People’s COP26 Decision for Climate Justice

    The COP26 Coalition has released its declaration for climate justice. It states that:

    Climate change already impacts and threatens billions of lives, with billions more on the line: it is those that have done the least to cause climate change that are most impacted, especially women, Black, Indigenous Peoples, and people of colour, peasants and rural people, youth, people with disabilities, local communities and frontline communities.

    The climate crisis also amplifies the structural inequalities and injustices that have been hardwired into our economic and political systems that have resulted in a spiralling debt crisis, Covid vaccine apartheid and growing inequality and poverty.

    It asserts that:

    People are tired of waiting for governments to prioritize people and the planet over profits while so many lives are being impacted and lost. We are out of time and out of patience.

    And it has produced a list of ten demands that includes “Global North countries pay[ing] their climate debt” and excluding big polluters from the process.

    It concludes by stating:

    The time for words without action has come and gone. We no longer have the luxury of time to sit back and allow governments and private interests to destroy our future. Scientific predictions are increasingly dire; it is not hyperbolic to assert that the very future of humanity depends on the outcomes of these negotiations. Governments must immediately heed the growing demands of those already facing crisis and those who will face crisis and bravely reimagine our world in a way that guarantees everyone the right to live with dignity and in harmony with our planet.

    The Era of Injustice is over!

     Protests continue

    A number of protests are due to take place on the final scheduled day of COP26, though the summit is expected to overrun into the weekend.

    The activists at the People’s Plenary are due to march from within the blue zone to meet other groups, who are gathering outside.

    A rally is expected to take place in Finnieston Street outside the venue in the afternoon.

    One of those speaking at the People’s Plenary was Ta’Kaiya Blaney, an indigenous activist from Canada.

    She said:

    Myself and others have been criminalised by our government.

    I watched (prime minister) Justin Trudeau pose for pictures with indigenous land defenders, meanwhile land defenders are taken as political prisoners back home.

    Mary Church, of Friends of the Earth Scotland, said the meeting was to express “deep frustration” with the climate summit.

    She continued:

    We are hurtling ever closer to reaching the critical 1.5C threshold.

    Climate change already impacts and threatens billions of lives.

    By The Canary

    This post was originally published on The Canary.