Skip to content or view screen version

Sussex Police Plan for anti-protest Dispersal Order at EDO Factory

* | 28.08.2009 18:46 | Smash EDO | Repression | South Coast

In 2006 Brighton arms maker EDO MBM and Sussex Police failed to get a permanent High Court injunction that would control protests at EDO MBM due to
the lack of legal justification and the abuse of the legal process by the company. It cost EDO MBM over $1 million.

Now Sussex Police internal minutes from Jan 2009 reveal they plan an even stricter ban on protest activities at the factory with the use of an anti-social behaviour 'Disperal Order'.

...
From Sussex Police website:


Brighton and Hove Command Team Meeting
Minutes 28 Jan 2009

Item 7. Divisonal Commander

Alan McCarthey:
GB confirmed that Alex Bailey is taking over from Alan McCarthy as Acting
Chief Executive and is reassured by the following points:

GB will co-chair the CDRP meetings with Jenny Rowlands in the interim
period. The CDRP Budget is looking at significant shortfalls for the year-
this has been discussed with Judith Macho and may require some of our posts
within this to be streamlined.

All concerned are keen to go ahead with the EDO dispersal order application-no noise measurements are currently available however. Judith Macho is prepared to conduct the measuring if required.

Action 14: PM to arrange for noise measuring to be carried out ref
Judith Macho

LATS are concerned that officers may be swayed by single issue people at
meetings.

Action 15: GB and JR to discuss LAT with LT and determine how to keep
LAT meetings focused.

...

Key to innitials

GB= C/Supt Graham Bartlett
CDRP= Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership
PM= C/Insp Petr Mills
JR= Supt Jane Rhodes
LT= C/Insp Lawrence Taylor
LATs =Local Action Teams

...

There are further references to Judith Macho measuring noise
levels at EDO demos in other police minutes,

A Sussex Police FOI response from 2007 gives examples of how dispersal orders have been used in the county during 2006.

ASB Dispersal Zones 2006 (Jan 2007)
[ Reference: FOI 1/07 ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Request: Hi
Can you list all the dispersal zones in Sussex?
Could you also provide a list of the times dispersal orders have been used in dispersal zones? Can you list all places, dates, reason for the action, and details about the individuals involved, eg age? Could this broken down into months starting January 2006-end of December 2006.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response by Sussex Police



The available information follows (obviously some people were dispersed more than once). I also attach a briefing document about the legislation.

January 2006

Preston Park, Brighton (residential area) designated on 31 October 05 for 26 weeks. Grounds for designation - general anti-social behaviour (ASB) caused by groups. 700 people dispersed in the 2006 3 month period. 6 under 16s taken home in same 3 month period.

Pebsham, Bexhill (residential area) designated on 30 January for 8 weeks. Grounds for designation - general ASB caused by groups. 49 people dispersed, 3 arrests, 1 ASBOs taken out.


February 2006

Hastings seafront (beach/beauty spot) designated on 6 February 06 for 12 weeks. Grounds for designation - street drinking/underage drinking. 128 people dispersed in a three month period.

Hastings seafront and Lower St Leonards (residential area) designated in August for 12 weeks. Grounds for designation - street drinking/underage drinking. 81 people were dispersed and 10 arrested in 3 month period.


May 06

Preston Park, Brighton (residential area) designated on 1 May for 26 weeks. Grounds for designation - general ASB caused by groups. 60 people dispersed and 5 under 16s taken home in 3 month period.


June 06

Seafront North to Churchill Square Brighton (town/city centre) designated on 15 June for 26 weeks. Grounds for designation - general ASB caused by groups. 30 people dispersed in a 3 month period.

---

A dispersal order on Home Farm Road would effectively criminalise all protest activity at the factory purely on grounds that police decided it was anti-social.

As yet no order has been confirmed.









*

Comments

Hide the following comment

Very Orwellian

28.08.2009 21:52

So "all protest" on Home Farm Rd would be "criminal"... So poretest is deemed anti-social, and the solution sought is anti-democratic.

Well done Sussex plod; do you have a enough brain cells to rub together???

Auntie Social