Juliet McBride was arrested inside the perimeter fence at the Atomic Weapons Establishment in March 2007, during a no Trident replacement protest.

After the court visited the site this afternoon, magistrates dismissed the case on the grounds that the SOCPA legislation applies only to the nuclear licensed site, not the entire space within the perimeter fence, and that Juliet McBride had not entered the licensed area when arrested.

The boundaries of the nuclear licensed site are clearly shown on the map issued with the license by the regulating authority, and there are multiple signs attached to the inner fence, also clearly marking the area.

Speaking after the case Juliet said, "The MoD have shown their usual crass incompetence in trying to extend the SOCPA legislation to meet their own needs rather than keeping to the law".

The court agreed an order for the defendant's costs.

-----

Background
Mrs McBride was sitting quietly on a fence holding a rainbow flag with
the word "peace" on it, when she was arrested on 10 March 2007. Her
action was to draw attention to the new developments at AWE Aldermaston
in the week of the parliamentary vote which approved the development of
a new generation of nuclear submarines from which to launch Trident
missiles. Work on the building of facilities to test, design and build
new warheads for the Trident system had, in advance of the vote, already
commenced at Aldermaston.

The government brought in s.128 of SOCPA 2005 in order to criminalise
trespass on sites designated by the Secretary of State. However, this is
the first case in the country to be brought under s.128 as amended by
s.12 of the Terrorism Act 2006 which criminalises trespass on a nuclear
licensed site. According to the MoD in 2006, the introduction of this
"offence will therefore protect the general public's democratic right to
protest by ensuring that any such protests are conducted in a safe and
controlled environment."

In her defence, Mrs McBride (who despite over 20 years of protest has no
previous convictions at Aldermaston) argued that the prosecution of a
peaceful protester under this legislation is disproportionate, and
violates the right to freedom of expression.

"Successive governments have shown they are determined to stifle
democratic participation in decision-making about Britain's nuclear
weapons", said Mrs McBride. " This prosecution is yet another strand in
that story..."

She also challenged the MoD's interpretation of the legislation to apply
beyond the boundaries of the Nuclear Licensed Site. During debate on the
Terrorism Bill, the Minister who introduced the amendment to SOCPA
stated that "there would have to be substantial entry beyond the
fence"and that "the individuals concerned would physically have to go
beyond the fence".

Other anti-nuclear and anti-war protesters have been prosecuted under
s.128 at Menwith Hill, the US spy-base; Faslane, from where Trident
nuclear submarines are deployed and - still awaiting trial - at
Lakenheath, from where US nuclear bombs were recently withdrawn.

------------ ----------------------------
Photographs available:
As above, hi-res

Notes:
[1] Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2006 amends the Serious Organised
Crime and Police Act 2005 (SOCPA), and provides for the offence of
criminal trespass at nuclear sites licensed by the Health and Safety
Executive, entering into force on 13 April 2006
 http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060011_en.pdf
According to an MoD press release (3 April 2006) these sites include the
Atomic Weapons Establishment Aldermaston, Atomic Weapons Establishment
Burghfield and Her Majesty's Naval Base Devonport.
 http://www.gnn.gov.uk/content/detail.asp?ReleaseID=194233&NewsAreaID=2&NavigatedFromSearch=True


For previous arrests at other military sites under the SOCPA, see for
example, "Helen and Sylvia, the new face of terrorism" (Independent, 6
April 2006) http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article356033.ece


[2] Hansard, HC Debates, 3 November 2005, Cols 1028-1029