|
ARKANGEL Journal of animal liberation |
Arkangel Magazine BCM 9240 London WC1N 3XX |
| We Are All Terrorists Now |
|
by Armitage Shanks Anyone who's been involved in animal rights campaigning for any length of time will soon be used to the way we are depicted by our opponents and the media as 'fanatics', 'extremists' and 'terrorists'. We shrug our shoulders and say 'Well, they would say that, wouldn't they?'. Unfortunately within a short space of time they will be right: according to British law, many people who read Arkangel and who campaign for animal rights will soon be terrorists. The new Terrorism Bill currently before Parliament will criminalise a large proportion of animal rights and environmental campaigners, especially those who carry out and support direct action. This is one of the many pieces of legislation designed to curb the right to protest, and it is undoubtedly the most draconian, yet paradoxically it has received little publicity. Even some campaigners seem not to have paid it much attention. The Prevention of Terrorism Act The first anti-terrorism bill was introduced in 1974 in the wake of IRA bombings in Britain. Such was the public outrage that it was felt special powers were needed to catch the perpetrators. These 'emergency provisions' were supposed to last only six months but have instead endured for over 25 years and will now be widened to catch even more 'criminals' via the updated Bill. The Prevention Of Terrorism Act (PTA) was used to systematically harass, intimidate and imprison Irish people. The vast majority of those arrested were never charged. Instead it was used - in the words of Tory Home Secretary Leon Brittan in 1985 - to 'gain information through questioning people'. Usual civil rights, such as access to lawyers, and to be taken before the courts, were drastically curtailed, and this will be reinforced in the new Bill. Why a New Act? It would seem strange that the powers-that-be would want to strengthen anti-terrorism laws when the Irish peace process has meant the most sustained lull in IRA activity for over 30 years. The real reason can be found elsewhere. The Bill is in fact the latest in a whole series of laws designed to weaken to ability to protest, to dissent. In the past fifteen years we have had the Public Order Act, two Criminal Justice Acts, a Crime and Disorder Act, and many lesser-known pieces of legislation, all intended to criminalise people who want to protest. The past 20 years has seen a huge growth in animal rights and environmental activism and especially in direct action. More and more people are no longer content just to lobby MPs and march from Hyde Park to Trafalgar Square now and again. They want to bring about change themselves, not wait for the remote possibility of politicians doing anything. Thus we have seen the emergence of grassroots animal rights activism, against the fur trade, live exports, hunting and vivisection, and environmental activism such as Earth First! and Reclaim The Streets. The state and the capitalist animal abusers and environment destroyers are becoming increasingly alarmed by this wave of activism. Brian Cass, Managing Director of Huntingdon Life Sciences, the largest contract testing laboratory in Europe, which has been under fierce attack by campaigners for years, wrote a letter to Tony Blair dated 28 March 2000, in which he called for the government 'to ensure that extremist animal rights groups are clearly brought within the legislation on terrorism'. What it Says I will not attempt a highly detailed guide to all the articles of the Bill - for that see the contacts section at the end - but a simple summary of the main points. 1) New Definition of Terrorism Under the Bill, terrorism is defined as: 'The use or threat of action for a political, religious or ideological cause involving serious violence against any person or property that endangers life or creates a serious risk to the health and safety of the public'. The definition extends the old definition to include the threat of serious violence against property. This is clearly aimed at animal rights/environmental campaigners, as a great deal of direct action involves damaging property, e.g. breaking into labs to rescue animals or tearing up GM crops. Most activists do not consider such actions 'violent', but they would fall under the new legislation. 2) Banned Organisations Like the old PTA, certain organisations can be proscribed, which means being a member or supporter of them is in itself an offence. But whereas the old Act only applied to Irish groups, the new one will be extended to this country and abroad. An organisation can be banned if it is involved in 'terrorism' as defined in section 1) above. It does not have to carry out terrorist acts itself, even to 'promote' or 'encourage' them is enough. Membership of a proscribed organisation or supporting one carries up to 10 years imprisonment. 'Support' includes arranging or helping to arrange a meeting in support of a banned group, to promote the group, or where a member of the group will speak. it also includes talking at a meeting to raise support for a banned group or knowing there will be someone there talking from a banned group. A 'meeting' need only be three people and does not have to be public. So you could be arrested for talking in your room with two others! We can't be sure at present whether any animal rights/environmentalist groups will be included but just imagine what an impact it would have if, for example, the Animal Liberation Front was proscribed. While the ALF does not have 'members', the ALF supporters' group could be in serious trouble. Even other groups that reported ALF actions - Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, to name but one - could fall within the net. 3) Terrorist Property Fundraising for what is described as terrorist purposes becomes an offence, where a person knows or thinks it may be used in such a way, with a maximum sentence of 14 years. Even the person that gives money is liable too. It is not necessary for police to show that the person knew the funds were definitely going to be used for terrorism, only that they thought they might be used. There is also a duty of disclosure on anyone who obtains information through work (e.g. journalists) that someone has done any of the above to report it to the police. Failure to do so is punishable by up to five years imprisonment. 4) Police Powers of Investigation Under the Bill the police may cordon off an area for the purposes of investigating acts of terrorism. This can in the first instance last up to 14 days but may be extended to a maximum of 28 days. They can then order anyone in the area to leave immediately, order anyone to leave 'premises' in the area immediately, order anyone to remove their vehicle or move it themselves, and stop anyone entering the area. One can see how this may be used. If the police know a demonstration is about to take place they could put a cordon around, for example, a laboratory or fur farm, because they suspect an act of terrorism - property damage - could occur. They could stop protesters entering the area and order those already there to leave immediately. Anyone who resists can be arrested and if convicted face up to five years imprisonment. This section of the Bill also gives the police extensive powers to enter and search buildings to obtain evidence. An officer of superintendent rank or above must authorise the cordons or search, but if 'urgent' any officer may do so. 5) Counter Terrorist Powers A police officer can arrest without warrant anyone they suspect of being a terrorist, whether or not an offence has actually been committed. This person can be held for up to 48 hours without access to a lawyer. An application for an extension can be made without the arrested person or their lawyer being present. The Bill also gives the police extensive stop and search powers. They can stop and search anyone they believe to be a terrorist to see if they have anything which could be used as information they are a terrorist. They can also designate a place or area and within that zone stop and search any vehicles, the drivers/passengers and anything they carry, or any pedestrians or anything they are carrying. This authorisation can last up to 28 days and can be extended, though the Secretary of State must be informed. 6) Miscellaneous Powers Directing the activities at any level of organisation involved in terrorism is an offence punishable by a maximum of life imprisonment. Even possessing something which may be used in committing a terrorist act can be punishable by up to 10 years imprisonment. If something is found in your home when you are raided, then the burden is on you, the accused, to prove that it doesn't belong to you. It is also an offence to collect/record/possess information likely to be useful to terrorist activity. Again the burden is on the accused to show they have a good excuse for possessing the information. Conclusion The powers of this Bill are extremely wide-ranging and represent a serious threat to protest groups. Whilst the consultation paper refers at length to dangers from overseas terrorist groups, it also has a section on 'Domestic Terrorism', which clearly outlines the thinking behind the Bill: "Animal rights and to a lesser extent environmental rights activists have mounted, and continued to pursue persistent and destructive campaigns... While the level of terrorist activity by such groups is lower and the sophistication of their organisation and methods less well developed... there is nothing to indicate the threat they pose will go away... There is also the possibility that new groups... will set up and adopt violent methods to impose their will on society... In the light of the above, the Government has come to the conclusion that any new counter-terrorism legislation should be designed to combat serious terrorist violence of all kinds" (Para 3.10, chap 3, consultation paper Legislation Against Terrorism, Dec 1998). Until recently there had been little attempt to build any opposition to the Bill. Many campaigners, I believe, have contented themselves with thinking that this piece of legislation will be no more effective in curtailing protest than were the Public Order and Criminal Justice Acts. This view may be mistaken. Firstly the POA and CJA have been used to hamper campaigners. At time of writing a man has been pulled before the courts accused of organising an illegal gathering under the POA, namely the June 18 1999 demonstrations against capitalism in the City of London. He got off in court, but under this Bill he could face far more serious charges, for example possessing materials that may be used for terrorist purposes. The biggest threat from the Bill, though, probably comes from the increased powers it gives the police to arrest and detain suspects. If those powers are used routinely on demos and arrests increased, then many people may be deterred from actively taking part in campaigns. There will always be a small hardcore who are prepared to risk arrest and imprisonment, but we need to attract newcomers so that the movement grows, and these are the sort of people who would be put off. There is a real uncertainty about the legality of many provisions in the Bill, since in October 2000 the European Convention on Human Rights will be incorporated into British law under a Human Rights Act. In December last year the Human Rights Commission found, 'at the drop of a hat', six instances where the Bill contravenes the incoming Act. Nevertheless, we would be naïve to place our trust in judges and politicians to protect our liberties - remember when the Labour Party was in opposition and used to challenge the renewal of the PTA? Now they're introducing something far worse. Further Action Opposition to the bill has fallen into two camps. On the one hand established groups and publications such as Greenpeace, Liberty, Index On Censorship and the Big Issue issued a joint statement in the press on 5 April in the form of an advertisement containing four photos - mass-murderer Fred West, Suffragette Emmeline Pankhurst, eco-activist Swampy and Nelson Mandela - with the caption: 'Spot the odd one out. Answer: Fred West... this government thinks he deserves more human rights than the others. Why should those who commit crimes of conscience face tougher justice than those driven by hate or greed?' For more information on this campaign contact Liberty on 020 7403 3888 or go to www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/mlobby2e.html. There is also a grassroots campaign spearheaded by A30 Group, which calls itself a loose collection of environmental direct actionists who have been involved in grassroots campaigns against road-building, genetic engineering, animal abuse industries and the CJA. The group is named after the date of the action they are organising in London on April 30, where they are asking protesters to come together for a massive 'class of 2000'-type photo, dressed as they would be for direct action, as a symbolic show of defiance to the Bill. They also organised a march/carnival against the Bill through Manchester on 1 April. A30 Group can be contacted: c/o Dept 29 255 Wilmslow Rd Manchester M14 5LW Tel: 0161 226 6814 Email: a30@nematode.freeserve.co.uk Their website is http://drink.to/dissent which contains plenty of links to other groups/campaigns. There is also a London Terrorism Bill campaign which is found at: www.blagged.freeserve.co.uk/terrorbill/index.htm. |