Skip to content or view screen version

Freedom to Protest Court Case - Smash EDO Protester Appeals Conviction

Andrew Beckett | 18.07.2008 10:48 | Smash EDO | Anti-militarism | Iraq | Palestine | South Coast | World

Smash EDO Press Release

18th July 2008

Freedom to Protest Court Case - Smash EDO Protester Appeals Conviction

For more info tel 07875708873, e mail  smashedopress@yahoo.co.uk

An anti arms campaigner is appealing his conviction on Monday 21st July. The man was arrested under a Brighton and Hove council byelaw for playing music at a demonstration outside Brighton arms manufacturers EDO MBM/ITT.

The Smash EDO campaign argue that Sussex Police's use of Brighton and Hove byelaws against protesters is a misuse of laws which were designed for a very different purpose. The byelaw police used was designed to deal with noise from drunks in the street and noisy street vendors, however Sussex Police have been using them to restrict political demonstrations during the last year.

Chloe Marsh, press spokeswoman for the campaign, said 'Sussex police are, yet again, acting in a biased and political way, misusing council byelaws in order to stamp out legitimate dissent'

EDO MBM are a Brighton based arms manufacturer making electrical weapons component for use by the US and UK armed forces in Iraq and the Israeli army in Palestine. Smash EDO have been campaigning to close them down for over four years. In December 2007 EDO MBM was taken over by ITT, a company with a history of working with Hitler, Franco and Pinochet.

Since May 2007 Sussex Police have threatened countless people and arrested four protesters under the terms of the Brighton and Hove City Council noise byelaw including one woman who is currently on trial for singing outside the factory. In January 2008 campaigners held a 'Freedom to Protest' march through Brighton to the Police Station in protest at Sussex Police's misuse of the law.


Notes for Journalists

The Company

EDO MBM Technologies Ltd are the sole UK subsidiary of huge U.S weapons manufacturer EDO Corp.From their base in Moulescoombe Brighton, EDO MBM manufacture vital parts for the Hellfire and Paveway weapons systems,laserguided missilesused extensively in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and Somalia. EDO Corp were recently acquired by ITT in multi-billion pound deal. ITT's links to fascism go back to the 1930s. The founder Sosthenes Behn was the first foreign businessman received by Hitler after his seizure of power.

The Campaign

There has been active campaign against the presence o f EDO MBM in Brighton since the outbreak of the Iraq war.Campaigners include students, Quakers ,Palestine solidarity activists, anti-capitalists and academics. Despite an injunction under the protection of harassment act (which failed) and over forty arrests the campaign is still going strong.Their avowed aim is to expose EDO MBM and their complicity in war crimes and to remove them from Brighton. They hold regular weekly demos outside the Moulescoombe factory on Wednesday's between 4 and 6.

THE FILM

On the Verge is an independent film about the SMASH EDO Campaign

“In 2004 a group of Brighton peace campaigners began to bang pot and pans outside their local arms manufacturers EDO MBM in disgust of their part in the Iraq war. This has grown into the Smash EDO campaign, which has cost the company millions, been the subject of large scale police operations and has tested the right to protest in the UK.Using activist, police and CCTV footage plus interviews with those involved in the campaign, 'On The Verge' tells the story of one of the most persistent and imaginative campaigns to emerge out of the UK's anti-war movement and direct action scene.”

Andrew Beckett
- e-mail: smashedopress@yahoo.co.uk
- Homepage: http://www.smashedo.org.uk

Comments

Hide the following 3 comments

Please come and support

18.07.2008 21:41

Hove court, Lansdowne Rd, Monday the 21st.

Smash EDO


case outcome

24.07.2008 05:55

what was the appeal outcome?

jonnie b good


Outcome

25.07.2008 12:17

On 23rd July 2008 in Hove Crown Court Judge Hayward and two lay magistrates dismissed the appeal of an anti-arms trade protestor against his conviction under a council bylaw enforced under section 235 of the Local Government Act 1972 which makes it an offence not to desist from shouting, singing, drumming,or playing loud music in a street or public place when asked to do so by a police constable or anyone else. Marcus Wise is the first political protester in Brighton to be convicted under the bylaw since it came into force in 1998.

Marcus Wise was found to have refused to desist after a request by a police officer to turn down a sound system under his control playing an assortment of musical compositions at a demonstration outside the EDO MBM arms factory in Home Farm Business Estate, Brighton, at around 4.45pm on 17 July 2007.

The police acted on the complaint of an employee of the arms company (who has since resigned) who said that the factory’s air conditioning was inadequate and she was forced on the day to leave a window open in hot weather. While the music was ‘entertaining at first’ it changed to ‘Reggae’ and became a nuisance. This meant the music was too loud to allow her to concentrate on her work assisting in the manufacture of weapons to kill civilian men women and children in the Middle East.

The defence counsel raised the issue that the bylaw should not be used in the context of political demonstrations as its introduction by the local Council was for other reasons.

A witness for the defence Alderman Francis Tonks, a former councillor on Brighton Council for 22 years, presented minutes of the meeting where the bylaw had been passed ten years ago.

The bylaw came into force in August 1998 was introduced to deal with alleged nuisance caused by groups of ‘drummers’ assembling by the West Pier, as well as street buskers, and car windscreen washing touts in the town. The bylaw was never intended to deal with political protests Alderman Tonks explained

Judge Hayward ruled that the bylaw was intended for ‘the prevention and suppression of nuisance’ and could be used at political demonstrations when music was being played loudly simply to cause nuisance rather than convey a 'relevant argument or message', otherwise it was clear that rights under the European Convention articles 10 and 11 did apply and protesters had a positive (though not absolute)right to make their political opinion heard even it if it was done in such a way as to be ‘irritating, contentious, unwelcome or evocative.’

The bylaw does not prohibit the use of megaphones, airhorns, or sirens, but does apply to singing, drumming and musical instruments, and amplified music that is played so loud as to cause a ‘nuisance’.

On hearing the judgement Mark Wise congratulated Judge Hayward on ‘criminalising peaceful protest while helping EDO continue in making bombs that will be used to kill and maim women and children.’

Judge Haywards findings appear to empower individual police officers to make a judgement that noise produced by shouting, singing, playing musical instruments or sound systems, is a 'nuisance' rather than a political protest yet leaves open the possibility that if political songs are sung in an irritating way or politically conscious music is played loudly enough to evoke an emotional response by the employees inside the factory, they remain exempt from the bylaw since these would be protected under ECHR Article 10 Freedom of Expression.

court watcher