Press release, Tuesday August 27, 2002

Strasbourg: after the liberation of the 17 pseudeo "hostage takers" from NO BORDER, the prosecutor, humiliated, is continuing his persecution of AHMED.


On Friday August 23, in Strasbourg, a collective of 17 people denounced the expedient and biased judgement that subjects AHMED, after the NO BORDER camp, to be put in prison as an example for all activists. These 17 people peacefully occupied an office of the Ministry of Justice.
Violently arrested after this action, the 17 demonstrators were brought immediately before the court, after a prolonged detention in the police station and having been detained in the Strasbourg jail. Faced with the
excessive charges against them and the demands of Prosecutor Vannier, the judge declared himself incompetent to judge the case, the court rejected the case, and the accused were freed.


Three demonstrators who were outside the building were also violently arrested, placed in detention in the police station for 24 hours and called before the court with a trial date of March 20, 2003. Furthermore, the prosecution being unsatisfied with Ahmed's first sentence, assistant
prosecutor VANNIER is now making an appeal against this first decision.

AHMED MEGUINI has been incarcerated since his arrest during a protest of the international NO BORDER camp, which struggles for freedom of movement and freedom of residence and against border control, which was held in Strasbourg from July 19 to 28. He was condemned to 8 months of prison,
with a possible parole hearing after 3 months, for charges that he continues to deny. Since his arrest, the prison Administration has kept him in solitary confinement and denied him all visits, claiming that, as an activist of the NO BORDER network, he might share his anti-prison ideas
with the other prisoners. The collective demands an end to all solitary confinement and that all prisoners have the right to receive visits.


STRONGARM TACTICS


The city even went so far as to send in a SWAT team ("special intervention" commando unit of the national police) to arrest those participating in the occupation. Although the prefect had asked for rubber bullets and reassured himself with the presence of the Anti-Criminal Brigade (national undercover rapid intervention force), he
also deployed the Emergency Medical Service and the Fire Department.
Police also beat four activists in a manner that was as brutal as it was secret. The prosecutor then came to the site, shouting about "hostage-taking," which carry penalties of 5 years in prison; he also assured that the arrests were carried out without the use of violence.


JUDICIAL ABBERATIONS


The decision to hold the arrestees in detention in the Strasbourg jail on Sunday night did not bode well for the presumption of innocence in this Orwellian affair. Their immediate hearing on Monday August 26 was blatantly expeditious, gathering all 17 defendants in the same witness
box, denying them not only the right to a defense, but also the most elementary logic and truth. This bizarre and expeditious procedure did not leave them the time to prepare a real defense. The accused who refused immediate trial risked being kept in preventative detention until
their trial, a month later, the same kind of blackmail for which AHMED has already paid the price.


As with each trial of a NOBORDER demonstrator or of their support committee, the access to the courtroom was partially blocked, transforming the hearing into a closed tribunal.


We have already shown how fantastic the charges against the 17 demonstrators were: they are accused of "breaking and entering, and holding victims against their will." The employees concerned were perfectly free to go. During the hearing, they themselves confirmed the defendants' story: they declared that they stayed in the office on the orders of their superiors via a telephone call from Paris. Those present on the scene, including journalists who had been called by the Alsace Daily News (Dernieres Nouvelles d'Alsace) bore witness confirming this.
The only employee who wished to press charges furthermore declared that he did wish to complain in his own name but under the orders of his superior, and that he did not wish to press charges of "hostage taking" but for "use of the telephone, fax, photocopier, and attempted use of a computer."


The witnesses of the prosecution became, by their own arguments, witnesses for the defense, so much so that Prosecutor VANNIER barely questioned them, leaving their questioning to the lawyer defending NO BORDER.


As far as the charge of "breaking and entering a private residence," the defense lawyers showed, as they had for the charge of "holding victims against their will," that the events did not fit the charge (unless, of course, the employees of the Ministry of Justice had chosen their
administrative office as their private residence...)


These accusations, which have recently been added to the classic list of "insulting an officer" and "resisting arrest" that follow many police interentions, seek to create a judiciary precedent to justify the multiplication of activists in prison and to leave the State with the
opportunity to condemn them heavily. The prosecutor clearly showed this by saying that it was necessary to put a stop to this type of political action: "This has got to stop!" Prosecutor VANNIER hammered incessantly during his argument.


The people arrested outside the building have furthermore been accused of refusal to submit and inciting a riot (a three-person riot...?)


Prosecutor Vannier undoubtedly made the crown jewel of his argument by condemning freedom of the press, by the aggravating circumstance he brought forth in the order for preventative detention: he denounced "the excessive emotion caused by the activists' press releases, which were designed to disturb public peace ... furthermore, they wished to engage the media" complained the Prosecutor during the hearing.


FLOP


It is therefore explicitly in the name of the political necessity to repress all dissent that the prosecutor requested pretrial detention for the 17 demonstrators (one month without appeal, three months of parole).
Finally, the court declared itself incompetent to judge the facts. After such an obvious camouflage (we couldn't say better ourselves how badly the prosecutor was out of his depth) the court finally consented to release the 17 hostages that had been in detention since friday night.


Let us remember that thay had already spent two nights in a police station and one night in prison for imaginary crimes. The prosecutor is still free to pursue the case in the high court. The outcome will be known in a few days.


A TRIAL TO MAKE AN EXAMPLE IN A GENERALIZED SECURITY OFFENSIVE:


If the accusations today came from the punitive fantasies of the local prosecutor, the repressive persecution is in itself an example of a real State policy whose repercussions largely surpasses the context of Strasbourg and of which the goal is to smother all forms of social and
political dissent. Since vacation time has come to an end in a security delirium (repression of the movewments of undocumented immigrants and threats of new mass deportations, first extradition of an old activist
from the Red Brigades to an Italian prison, applied under new daily security laws...) it is not surprising then, that a simple occupation, a form of political action that is often practiced, should be criminalized outright and considered a terrorist act.


During the NO BORDER camp (a network of collectives and individuals struggling for freedom of movement and freedom of residence and against borders, which assembled 2000 people in Strasbourg from July 18 to 28) the police and thep rosecutor already tried to prevent the various
manifestations planned (march against an immigrant detention center, undocumented immigrants rally, street theatre, inner-ring suburbs caravan)at any price. Let us remember the rubber bullets shot from potentially deadly distances, the prohibition against any protest or gathering of more than 5 people by police decree, the violent arrests (about 50, in all) and multiple detentions in the police station, and the incarceration and condemnation of Ahmed on the basis of a few incoherent police testimonies.


THE PROSECUTOR IS APPEALING AHMED'S SENTENCE:


Despite his failure today, the prosecutor is having a tantrum and has announced that he will appeal to increase the sentence of AHMED: this second trial will take place in two months.


But many collectives and organizations are aware of this and have already expressed their solidarity and joined the collective to support AHMED and the other defendants. During his trial, there were support actions that
took place in cities across France and Europe.


Thanks to their determination, after their occupation of the ministry of justice building, the 17 activists of the support collective believe that they have already succeeded, because of the surprising cooperation of the
prosecutor VANNIER, in coming closer to AHMED and in thereby courageously defying the order that denied Ahmed all visits. They are still unsatisfied, however, because despite their presence for one night in the same prison, rthey have still not succeeded in fully bringing Ahmed out of isolation. This is why they intend to continue their actions until Ahmed is free.


No Border in exodus calls for all prosecutions engaged against the other participants of the camp to be dropped, and for an end to prosecutions of those who protest against the French State, its justice, and its prisons.


-Committee to support ahmed and the other defendants
No Border in Exodus
Monday August 26, 8:30 pm