socpa: first overturned verdict in the crown court
rikki | 09.04.2006 09:57 | SOCPA | Indymedia | Repression
on april 6th, brian haw's campaign manager and long-standing right-hand woman, maria gallestegui, won a historic battle against the ridiculous section 132 law banning protest around parliament. her case was thrown out of the high court when the prosecution offered little evidence.
maria's arrest came on the very first day the 'serious organised crime and police act' (socpa) law came into effect - august 1st 2005. there was a demonstration against the new law organised by 'stop the war coalition' (none of whom, mysteriously, were arrested).
maria works as a school bus driver, but for several years now she has worked closely with brian haw (the man who has spent nearly five years outside parliament in a lone protest with his numerous placards reminding mps and others of the genocide visited on the children and innocent population of iraq in the name of 'freedom' and 'justice'. he is also widely thought to be the reason this section 132 clause was brought into existence, in order to clear the pavement and the war criminals' conscience of his eternal blot. but the attempt to silence him was thwarted by the high court decision, made just three days before august 1st, that his protest was immune as the new act could not be applied retrospectively and he had been there since 2001). he was in the high court again last week defending his rights after the government appealed against the decision, and a ruling on his current status is expected in the next few days.
in the hearing of maria's case (www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2006/01/331285.html), the court heard how she has supported him in many ways, co-ordinating others to make sure that the square was never left unattended when brian had court appearances or food and ablution breaks. she herself stayed in the square when brian was in hospital. she looked after his welfare and made sure he had an opportunity to have regular showers and clean changes of underwear etc. she made sure that he ate either by arranging cover for him to leave his space, or by bringing him food. in 2005 when brian ran for parliament, she was his campaign agent. all this meant that she was under the impression that she too would be immune from the new legislation as she was clearly part of his protest.
the judge, nicholas evans, who has now been over-ruled, decided that she had infact been taking part in the unauthorised stwc demo that afternoon, and he fined her £100 plus costs.
in her appeal at southwark crown court, it didn't take long for the judges to decide that the cps had offered little evidence.
this decision is historic in that it was the first socpa conviction to be overturned. however, the battle to have the law repealed goes on, and the first conviction overturned on human rights grounds will be the real victory to come. people are still receiving criminal convictions under the new law, and last week mark barrett was fined the largest amount yet (£250 plus £250 costs). next wednesday at 10am, milan rai will hear his verdict at bow street magistrates court. he is the first, and to my knowledge, only person to be charged as an organiser of an unauthorised demo, and if found guilty, may face a large fine and/or possible imprisonment. (publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/335983.html).
the campaign continues, and last weekend saw a mass of activity in parliament square with illegal demos on both days, one of which, the 'naming the dead' ceremony on sunday attracted more than 200 people and lots of media attention. there was one arrest and one 'reporting for possible summons later'. both were of a character dressed as charlie chaplin who was waving banners that said 'not aloud', and 'careless talk costs lives'!!!! this law is an ass.
the sunday campaigning picnics still meet every week after 1pm
www.peopleincommon.org
brian haw's battle continues
www.parliament-square.org.uk
maria works as a school bus driver, but for several years now she has worked closely with brian haw (the man who has spent nearly five years outside parliament in a lone protest with his numerous placards reminding mps and others of the genocide visited on the children and innocent population of iraq in the name of 'freedom' and 'justice'. he is also widely thought to be the reason this section 132 clause was brought into existence, in order to clear the pavement and the war criminals' conscience of his eternal blot. but the attempt to silence him was thwarted by the high court decision, made just three days before august 1st, that his protest was immune as the new act could not be applied retrospectively and he had been there since 2001). he was in the high court again last week defending his rights after the government appealed against the decision, and a ruling on his current status is expected in the next few days.
in the hearing of maria's case (www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2006/01/331285.html), the court heard how she has supported him in many ways, co-ordinating others to make sure that the square was never left unattended when brian had court appearances or food and ablution breaks. she herself stayed in the square when brian was in hospital. she looked after his welfare and made sure he had an opportunity to have regular showers and clean changes of underwear etc. she made sure that he ate either by arranging cover for him to leave his space, or by bringing him food. in 2005 when brian ran for parliament, she was his campaign agent. all this meant that she was under the impression that she too would be immune from the new legislation as she was clearly part of his protest.
the judge, nicholas evans, who has now been over-ruled, decided that she had infact been taking part in the unauthorised stwc demo that afternoon, and he fined her £100 plus costs.
in her appeal at southwark crown court, it didn't take long for the judges to decide that the cps had offered little evidence.
this decision is historic in that it was the first socpa conviction to be overturned. however, the battle to have the law repealed goes on, and the first conviction overturned on human rights grounds will be the real victory to come. people are still receiving criminal convictions under the new law, and last week mark barrett was fined the largest amount yet (£250 plus £250 costs). next wednesday at 10am, milan rai will hear his verdict at bow street magistrates court. he is the first, and to my knowledge, only person to be charged as an organiser of an unauthorised demo, and if found guilty, may face a large fine and/or possible imprisonment. (publish.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/03/335983.html).
the campaign continues, and last weekend saw a mass of activity in parliament square with illegal demos on both days, one of which, the 'naming the dead' ceremony on sunday attracted more than 200 people and lots of media attention. there was one arrest and one 'reporting for possible summons later'. both were of a character dressed as charlie chaplin who was waving banners that said 'not aloud', and 'careless talk costs lives'!!!! this law is an ass.
the sunday campaigning picnics still meet every week after 1pm
www.peopleincommon.org
brian haw's battle continues
www.parliament-square.org.uk
rikki
Additions
more info on this
09.04.2006 18:08
i spoke to maria this afternoon, and confirmed that not only was her charge under section 132 thrown out, but the charge of obstructing a police officer, arising from her attempt to hang on to another socpa defendant who the police were trying to drag away, was also dismissed by the judge and two magistrates. the prosecution wasted court time with witnesses not turning up, papers not ready, and general lack of evidence. whether this was due to complete incompetence, or due to an unwillingness to continue with the prosecution under this controversial and idiotic law, remains unclear.
mixed messages abound over the use of section 132. last weekend, scores of demonstrators defied the act on saturday with the clowns, fairies and ghouls parade, openly causing a spectacle and brandishing political placards, while on sunday the 'naming the dead' ceremony attracted hundreds who did likewise. there were no connected arrests. but last friday, mark barrett received a £500 sting and a criminal record for wearing one small placard at a picnic, and today barbara tucker received a warning and narrowly avoided arrest when police backed down in the face of media presence and a barrage of diatribe from brian haw.
this week is crucial in the battle of section 132 with the brian haw verdict coming any day soon, and milan rai's verdict on wednesday.
mixed messages abound over the use of section 132. last weekend, scores of demonstrators defied the act on saturday with the clowns, fairies and ghouls parade, openly causing a spectacle and brandishing political placards, while on sunday the 'naming the dead' ceremony attracted hundreds who did likewise. there were no connected arrests. but last friday, mark barrett received a £500 sting and a criminal record for wearing one small placard at a picnic, and today barbara tucker received a warning and narrowly avoided arrest when police backed down in the face of media presence and a barrage of diatribe from brian haw.
this week is crucial in the battle of section 132 with the brian haw verdict coming any day soon, and milan rai's verdict on wednesday.
rikki
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
V FOR VICTORY. Anthony Blair, SOCPA, and New Labour are going down.
09.04.2006 20:12
changes changes changes
Matthew Cuffe
e-mail:
matthewcuffe@gmail.com
Homepage:
http://blairwitch.typepad.com
!
10.04.2006 10:56
M
MARK BARRETT and his Conviction under the SOCPA 2005
22.02.2007 14:44
The political means to stifle freedom of speech around Parliament - for the Blair Elective Dictator to try to control and stifle public debate - BRIAN HAW'S PROTEST AND THE 2 MILLION PERSON LONDON MARCH WERE SOME OF THE BIGGEST EMBARRASSMENTS FOR ELECTIVE DICTATOR LABOUR PARTY LEADER TONY BLAIR "Princess Tony" tucked up in the Blair Bunker...
MARK BARRETT was treated unfairly that is clear.
I know Mark Barrett. He is an idealist - with conviction [he acts in the way he believes with conscience].
If you want support Mark - I am here to help you.
Mark like me believes that Parliament - the place of democracy - should be accessible not out of bounds - THE LASTING LEGACY OF BLAIR - THE ELECTIVE DICTATOR
TRANSPARENCY - ACCOUNTABILITY - DEMOCRACY
ELECTIONS - 3 MAY 2007
ELECTIONS - 3 MAY 2007 are the local ELECTIONS
ELECTIONS - 3 MAY 2007
- after then BLAIR is F -I - N - I - S - H - E - D
Your actions and my actions will contribute to his demise
THE BLAIR LASTING LEGACY - BLAIR IS A TRULY EVIL MAN
mark's friend
BLAIR - NUCLEAR POWER - BLAIR PLANS ARE MISLEADING AND FLAWED - BLAIR - B.LIAR
22.02.2007 19:17
ELECTIONS - 3 MAY 2007 - END OF BLAIR
RESPECTED JUDGE DEALS BLOW TO BLAIR'S NUCLEAR PLANS
Court rules consultation on power stations was 'MISLEADING AND FLAWED'
Will Woodward, chief political correspondent
Friday February 16, 2007
The Guardian
Tony Blair at a visit to the Sellafield nuclear power plant.
Tony Blair's plan to pave the way for a new generation of nuclear power stations by the time he leaves office was in disarray yesterday after the high court ruled the government had carried out a "misleading" and "seriously flawed" consultation on its energy review.
Mr Justice Sullivan's judgment forces the government to canvass public opinion once again and is likely to force a delay of several months in the publication of the energy white paper, which had been expected in March.
Article continues
The judge delivered a significant symbolic victory to Greenpeace. The organisation had applied for judicial review of the 12-week consultation last year which it condemned as a sham.
The prime minister insisted last night that new nuclear power stations had to be part of future energy provision. "This won't affect the policy at all," he said. The trade and industry secretary, Alistair Darling, said he was unlikely to appeal against the ruling, and promised "to put it right and consult properly, to make sure we can get the process back on track".
Ministers will decide next week whether to go ahead with the white paper next month. They believe they may technically be able to proceed even if the new consultation has not been completed, but realise that could be another PR disaster.
Mr Darling said climate change meant the UK was "in a race against time" to reduce dependency on oil and gas, and deliver a 60% cut in CO2 emissions by 2050. "On a matter so important as climate change it just isn't possible to stand back and say: 'We don't have any views'," he told the BBC.
Last July the government gave the green light to new nuclear power stations, promising to speed up the planning and regulatory regime but insisting they had to be funded by private investors.
Whitehall sources stressed yesterday that new nuclear power stations would not appear before the late 2010s at the earliest, and that timetable was unaffected by yesterday's judgment.
Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat environment spokesman, said: "The judgment really shows you can't perform a 180-degree U-turn on a matter as important as nuclear power without a proper public debate."
Alan Duncan, the shadow trade and industry secretary, said: "This is an astonishing ruling. The government has been shown up as fundamentally deceitful."
Nuclear energy accounts for 19% of UK energy but the phasing out of existing plants means that by 2020 it will only provide 7%. But Mr Blair wants new stations to be built in order to deliver up to 40% of future supply.
Sarah North, head of Greenpeace's nuclear campaign, said ministers had "now been forced back to the drawing board to conduct a proper and lengthy review".
Mr Justice Sullivan said something had gone "clearly and radically wrong" with the consultation paper, issued last January. "The 2006 consultation document contained no information of any substance on any of the issues identified as being of crucial importance," he said. "It was not merely inadequate but it was also misleading."
Greenpeace argues that nuclear energy is not as environmentally-friendly as the government claims. "Nuclear power is a dangerous distraction from the real solutions to climate change as it only represents 3.6% of our total energy," said Ms North.
Useful link
Government's report on the energy review
Related articles
11.07.2006: Go-ahead for £12bn atomic revival
11.07.2006: Power play
11.07.2006: Sure, nuclear power is safer than in the past - but we still don't need it
04.07.2006: I've changed my mind on nuclear power, admits Blair
28.06.2006: The lights will go out if we avoid the nuclear option, says Darling
14.06.2006: Carbon pricing to encourage new nuclear power stations
10.06.2006: Chirac agrees to share expertise as Blair pushes case for nuclear power stations
09.06.2006: Tories refuse to give guarantees to nuclear power industry
08.06.2006: Gorbachev puts anti-nuclear case to Blair
29.05.2006: Blair adviser calls for more nuclear power
b.liar