SMASH EDO: Protesting Is Not Harrassment!
Anon.... | 01.05.2005 23:26 | Anti-militarism | South Coast
Smash Edo is a group of concerned individuals campaigning to end the military activities of EDO MBM Technology Ltd are organising. People involved in the anti-EDO campaign include, but are not limited to: local residents, the Brighton Quakers, peace activists, anti-capitalists, Palestine Solidarity groups, human rights groups, trade unionists, academics and students.
PROTESTING IS NOT HARRASSMENT!
Anti war campaigners won a major victory in the High Court on Friday 29th April. Arms manufacturer EDO MBM had applied for an
injunction, under anti-stalking laws, to restrict protest outside their
Brighton factory. The order sought by the corporation would have created
an exclusion zone, where protests would only be allowed on Thursday
afternoons for two hours, with a maximum of 10 silent protestors.
The defendants refused to negotiate the terms of the injunction, in order
to avoid lending legitimacy to the proceedings. In stark contrast to the
demands of EDO, Judge Gross ruled that in the run up to the trial an
“interim” injunction would not restrict the timing, frequency, or numbers,
allowed on demonstrations. He threw out 11 of 15 draconian terms,
describing them at one point as 'using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.' In
explaining his refusal to impose most of the conditions Judge Gross said,
“Freedom of expression is a right jealously guarded in English law”.
However campaigners continue to insist that any use of the Protection from
Harassment Act 1997, (originally introduced to protect people from
stalking), is a gross violation of their civil liberties.
One of the defendants said afterwards, “EDO have made a great mistake in
bringing this action to court. Their contempt for human rights has been
exposed to the general public, and even at this stage of the trial, the
judge has effectively demolished their proposed exclusion zone. EDO are
proud of their role as spear carriers for an illegal war, but where is the
injunctive relief for the people of Iraq?”
Campaigners are looking forward to a swift trial, where they will expose
EDO's complicity in war crimes and Sussex Police’s attack on the right to
protest.
Anti war campaigners won a major victory in the High Court on Friday 29th April. Arms manufacturer EDO MBM had applied for an
injunction, under anti-stalking laws, to restrict protest outside their
Brighton factory. The order sought by the corporation would have created
an exclusion zone, where protests would only be allowed on Thursday
afternoons for two hours, with a maximum of 10 silent protestors.
The defendants refused to negotiate the terms of the injunction, in order
to avoid lending legitimacy to the proceedings. In stark contrast to the
demands of EDO, Judge Gross ruled that in the run up to the trial an
“interim” injunction would not restrict the timing, frequency, or numbers,
allowed on demonstrations. He threw out 11 of 15 draconian terms,
describing them at one point as 'using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.' In
explaining his refusal to impose most of the conditions Judge Gross said,
“Freedom of expression is a right jealously guarded in English law”.
However campaigners continue to insist that any use of the Protection from
Harassment Act 1997, (originally introduced to protect people from
stalking), is a gross violation of their civil liberties.
One of the defendants said afterwards, “EDO have made a great mistake in
bringing this action to court. Their contempt for human rights has been
exposed to the general public, and even at this stage of the trial, the
judge has effectively demolished their proposed exclusion zone. EDO are
proud of their role as spear carriers for an illegal war, but where is the
injunctive relief for the people of Iraq?”
Campaigners are looking forward to a swift trial, where they will expose
EDO's complicity in war crimes and Sussex Police’s attack on the right to
protest.
Anon....
Homepage:
http://www.smashedo.org.uk
Comments
Display the following 6 comments