Mass
Arrests In Wellington - Police Attack Anti-War Protests by Mark Eden
Peace Researcher 29 – June 2004
In 2003 during the mass anti war protests around the country, there were for the most part, very few arrests. Unfortunately this was not the case in Wellington, where the anti-war movement had to deal with nearly 40 arrests. The high arrest rate in Wellington was due to two factors. Firstly, Peace Action Wellington (PAW), which organised most of the demonstrations, was willing to be noisy and disruptive to get its point across.
Secondly, the Wellington Police have a
particularly aggressive and violent unit called the Strategic Response Group
(SRG) which is used to police all major demonstrations. The SRG must have the
lowest conviction rate of any Police unit in the country as they have made
about 200 protest arrests over the last few years in Wellington but secured
only half a dozen convictions. Several protesters have also received thousands
of dollars in compensation and damages after being illegally assaulted by SRG
members. It seems likely that a political decision was made to have a heavy
Police presence at Wellington anti-war protests, as even small PAW
demonstrations would attract the attention of the SRG.
In February 2003, as King Bush was preparing for war by hyping up the
possibility that Saddam Hussein might have access to "weapons of mass
destruction", a group of concerned citizens decided to attempt to enter
the US Embassy in Wellington, looking for weapons of mass destruction. 23
people were arrested, mostly for disorderly behaviour, when they tried to climb
the Embassy fence.
In March, Australian Prime Minister John Howard came to town to have lunch with Helen Clark. About 800 protesters turned up with pots and pans and other noise making devices to disrupt Johnny’s lunch. As the protest ended Police waded in and arrested five people, some quite violently. In the following days one of those arrested was also charged with burning the New Zealand flag and became the first person ever to be charged with a crime under the Flags and Emblems act. Another PAW activist was arrested at his home a month later and charged in connection with the flag burning incident.
On September 13th, a day of
action against the World Trade Organisation and war was held. A group of
protesters were outside the electorate office of Cabinet Minister Marion Hobbs
when Police started arresting people for writing slogans with chalk on the
footpath. Within a few minutes eight people had been arrested for a variety of
charges including one woman who was assaulted and injured by Police and ended
up being charged with assaulting an officer herself.
Several people were arrested at the
other big anti war protests at the US Embassy and several PAW members faced
charges resulting from smaller protests throughout the year. Two activists were
arrested for allegedly painting anti-war graffiti during a protest camp, but
charges were later dropped. Don Franks was arrested after protesting against a
NZ Defence Industry Association meeting at Te Papa Museum. He was charged with
assault despite being assaulted himself by an over-zealous security guard. He
later made a donation to charity in return for the charges being dropped.
Later in the year several District Court trials were held and most of the
protesters were found not guilty. Of the 17 people who went to trial for the US
Embassy weapons inspection, six were found guilty but let off without
conviction. The John Howard protest trial ended with several convictions
including one for flag burning, but these are currently being appealed. The
activists arrested outside Marion Hobbs’ office defended the charges. On May 27th 2004 charges against
one person were dropped, and the remaining defendants were due in court in
early June.
PAW has a legal
defence fund and any donations will be greatly appreciated. They can be sent
to: Peace Action Wellington, PO Box 9314, Wellington.
Peace Researcher 29 – June 2004
PR 28 (December
2003, “US Embassy Complains, NZ Police Jump”, by Bob Leonard) reported the
alarming 2003 case of Auckland activist Bruce Hubbard who, on the basis of an
e-mail sent to the US Embassy in protest at the US-led invasion of Iraq, was
the subject of a complaint by the Embassy and, many months later, arrested and
charged under the Telecommunications Act. You can read the article online at http://www.converge.org.nz/abc/pr28-88.html At the time we speculated as to whether the
more recent and much nastier Counter-Terrorism Act could be used in cases such
as this.
We’re pleased to report that the State backed off. To quote from Global Peace and Justice Auckland (Newsletter 52, 22/1/04): “It’s great to announce a victory to start the new year the Police decision to drop all charges against GPJA activist Bruce Hubbard for allegedly sending an ‘offensive’ e-mail to the US Embassy. The Police conceded they lacked the standard of proof required for a conviction. Bruce¹s lawyer, Rodney Harrison QC, pointed out that that should have been obvious much earlier, that Bruce was appalled at the continuing prosecution and that Bruce will be seeking costs. Despite this victory the very fact the prosecution was started and the harassment of Bruce continued for some months was a warning to all Peace and Justice activists as to the lengths the rulers will go to silence its critics. Democratic rights need to be defended continually to be effective”. Exactly.
As of May 2004, the question of costs was not
resolved. The court awarded costs but the Police contested them. The cops
agreed to accept the word” reckless” in relation to their prosecution of Bruce
but objected to it being described as “politically motivated”. So no sum has
yet been agreed on, let alone paid out.
|
|
|
|