the 9th peaceful anti-cuts occupation in trafalgar square began last night. during the evening there were six arrests and plenty of intimidation. this morning couple of dozen protestors were evicted by a police operation involving 150 officers. they were also told a section 60 is in force today J30.
click on image for larger version. all images are 'some rights reserved' - free for credited non-commercial use, otherwise contact author for permission
------------
at 6.30 yesterday evening, the anti-cuts occupation began in trafalgar square, with around 20 activists setting up a small marquee, and a ring of tents at the bottom of the steps near the olympic clock display.
as they have peacefully occupied this area on eight previous occasions, and as they had checked with the GLA that the square was not being used until friday morning, by which time they had pledged to peacefully leave, they did not expect any problems.
however, after a couple of hours, the heritage wardens, who had been filming them, were joined by police, and one of the protestors was targetted to be read the bye-laws. it was explained first by a heritage warden that he was in breach of the bye-laws and if he refused to leave he would have to submit his name and address for possible action against him. the police then added that if he didn't submit his details he would be arrested and taken to the station until he did so.
two grey suited GLA personnel seemed to be in charge of the operation, one of them continuously talking, perhaps to legal advisors, on the phone, and liaising with his wardens and the police.
the occupation group had a concensus meeting and agreed a principle of non-co-operation while leaving individuals to make their own decisions if targetted. the first arrest duly took place, and the activists was walked to the van and taken to charing cross station. there, he soon gave his details, and was allowed to leave, returning to the camp immediately.
after a while the heritage wardens approached another person and the same ritual was enacted. this time, the activist refused to walk with police and was then dragged to the next waiting van. he too returned after giving his details.
the third arrest was made all the more comical, pointless and surreal, due to the fact that the activists wore his 'v for vendetta' anonymous mask throughout the whole proceedings. the arrest was filmed, and appears to be unlawful because the police did not read him his rights, nor explain to him why he was being arrested, despite repeated requests on camera. apparently he kept his mask on throughout the encounter, eventually giving up his details and being allowed back to the square, mask intact.
the whole process occurred three more times, with the targets chosen perhaps arbitrarily or perhaps because wardens recognised them as regulars from previous occupations. also by about 11pm, a loose ring of 30 police were surrounding the camp at a distance in the square, and around half a dozen police vans littered the pavements, including a large prisoner transporter. a little before midnight they were also joined by a van of tsg riot police, and it looked like an eviction might be under consideration.
without explanation though, the police then withdrew, leaving just a few observing the occupation, and the night passed peacefully.
at around 7am this morning, they camp was again addressed by police, who told them that the area was needed to begin setting up for tomorrow's 'canada day' celebrations and that they were therefore required to leave, and would be evicted if necessary.
slowly the camp organised itself, and by 8.30 they were near the end of a concensus meeting at which they had made the decision to peacefully leave, when they were completely surrounded by more than 100 police, and they then packed up and were escorted out of the square.
the 'anonymous' mask wearer was told to remove his face covering this morning, informed that there was a section 60 in force throughout the day. are the police expecting to cause trouble with the public sector unions i wonder?
Original article on IMC London:
