an open letter to g20 arrestees
An open letter to the G20 arrestees:
Hi all. Wondering who you are and how you’re going. Have been going to a few of
the solidarity meetings. Its funny that I haven’t seen any of you there. Its
pretty difficult to run a campaign in solidarity with people when you don’t
know:
who they are
what they’ve been charged with
what they want to do
But anyway, we press on. I hear on the grapevine that you’ve been charged
variously with:
riot
affray
conduct endangering life
Riot and affray are pretty standard to any student demo. conduct endangering
life is a new one though. And just today some kids in Sydney have been charged
with burglary - very weird. I’m not sure what they’re supposed to have
burgled….
Anyway, apparently they’ve been tracked down by the Victorian anti-terror
police. This is kind of scary - the repression is being ratcheted up - or at
least the waters are being tested.
And from the perspective of the state, the water seems fine…
My understanding of conduct endangering life is that it is a charge that alleges
that you engaged in conduct that could have caused death, whereas conduct
endangering persons is saying that you could have hurt somebody. This is a
fucking ambit claim - but its a useful way to scare the shit out of people and
get them to hang on the every word of their lawyers. Lawyers are naturally
conservative beasts - I’ve only ever heard one lawyer tell student protesters
that the best way to get out of the charges was to fight them politically,
through rallies, public meetings, etc. And he was right in my case.
Unfortunately, he now works for the Police Association…. Fuck you Marcus
Clayton, if you’re reading this. I know that the lawyers are telling you that a
political campaign will endanger your legal defence because it demonstrates that
you show no remorse - remorse for what exactly? Have you done something wrong?
Of course not!
But I don’t think the legal wranglings are the real problem - as easy as it is
to blame Rob Stary for the shitty outcome of the Monash case in 2004 (where the
Monash occupiers signed an apology letter, printed in the student paper to avoid
convictions - a smaller group of three people copped guilty without conviction
thanks to the genius of another lawyer - a meaningless difference in this state
because the Vic cops insist on sharing such info with others in other
jurisdictions), actually the real problem with the Monash campaign was that the
students trusted their lawyers, and abrogated any political responsibilities to
themselves and to the campaign. They internalised the idea that they had
something to apologise for, and that actually, they should NOT have crossed the
bounds of law and order in their pursuit of the campaign objectives. That’s why
they said sorry - their apology also promised that they wouldn’t do it again. I
am sure that’s the case, cos most of them were law students who seem to think
that the law is something that we should be upholding rather than challenging.
You know what I think the problem is? I have a fear that maybe you guys think
that you have done something wrong. This astounds me.
The key element of the repression we’re seeing at the moment is the
internalisation of that repression. People have gone “underground” for fear of
police repression - so the repression has been successful. Congratulations - the
cops have won already. The arrestees don’t even want to be in a room together
because of bail conditions (bail conditions which have been challenged and
defeated by others) - the cops have already won. The criminalisation of protest
has been successful - because people are behaving like they’re naughty, like
they have something to hide. But people don’t.
What happened at G20 was a response to not only a concerted campaign of
harrassment of squats and activists throughout the week by a police taskforce,
but also to the very real violence of the G20. The city was shut down so that
the G20 could meet behind an unprecented security cordon. A police van was
slightly damaged in response. The G20 has no right to exist, no right to meet.
We tried to stop it. We didn’t, but the attempt to do so was justified, and such
behaviour should be encouraged. We are after all part of a global movement
against these institutions and the governments that support them - look at what
the kids are getting up to in Colombia and across Latin America right now. Jolly
good show.
Now, people have gone “underground” like its Chile in the 70s or something. Give
me a fucking break. The only way to defend these actions is to defend them
publicly. If we don’t want to suffer police repression, then we shouldn’t suffer
police repression. We should openly combat it. There are those who have
challenged the bail conditions - but they’re still scared to talk about a
defence campaign because their lawyers are telling them not to. When people hand
over their political responsibilities to their lawyers, we’re in serious
trouble.
There has been no public challenge to the idea that we did something wrong. If
the arrestees don’t want to run a campaign cos they’re scared of going to jail -
a ridiculous suggestion unless of course the political climate is allowed to
remain so hostile to protest that the prosecution reckon they can really test
the waters enough to try to get away with jail terms - others need to. I think
the only way that people will get seriously done on these charges is if we allow
the demonisation to continue. Jack Thomas had a lot more to worry about with
going public, and the only time he got in trouble was when he listened to his
lawyers and went on ABC to do an interview. There’s a lesson in that for all of
us.
So, to the arrestees: if you don’t want to come to meetings, that’s fine. Maybe
you could post to email lists of Indymedia anonymously, whatever. But please -
we kind of need to know what is going on. We need updates about what your
lawyers are telling you, what discussions, if any, you have had with people
being represented by different legal teams, and if not, why not. If you need
help challenging the ridiculous bail conditions (this costs money, I know), give
us a call. We can provide assistance and monies to do this. Its pretty important
that all of you get in a room together to talk about what we need to do, and
discuss political strategy with people involved in these movements and campaigns
- ie not your lawyers. Otherwise you’re not going to have any involvement in
what is a pretty important campaign to push back the repression of protest. And
you’ll have to hang out with lawyers. yucky.
Liz “I was at the G20 protest and I had a great time” Thompson
Fucking great letter Liz!
Comment by Aotearoa Anarchist — March 15, 2007 @ 3:15 am
Thanks for that Liz, had a bad day and needed a good laugh. Pissed myself laughing. I have this vision of a solidarity meeting with cardboard cut-outs of the arestees. The meeting is having a really serious meeting about how to support the arestees, but one problem - Where are the arestees? ‘No appearance your worship’
Comment by Bizarre — March 15, 2007 @ 10:13 am
Hi Liz thanks for that, I think the support crew need to be guided and support the arrestees in the way they want to be supported. Those of us who choose to run a political campaign will, and those who dont make that choice are entitled to make
that decison, its our arses on the line after all. look forward to meeting the solidarity crew at the fundrasier tonight.
noho ora mai
Ana
Comment by Ana — March 15, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
Hey Ana and others,
I think that its all of our arses on the line in terms of the ratcheting up of state repression and how we respond to it, but I take your point. And my point is that the thing about getting together in a room is not just about holding your hands and giving you cups of tea. A campaign that combats the demonisation of protest, rather than one that silences the activists arrested, is the best legal defence.
I’ve got one angry letter in response already from someone who is unhappy that I have asked him to sacrifice himself (apparently) for my cause.
Let there be no misunderstanding: I am not asking anyone to sacrifice anything. I am trying to make suggestions that I think will not only keep you out of jail, but will further the public discussion around the legitimacy of protest. I’m not asking you to put yourselves in it. I’m suggesting that the current softly softly approach is what will fuck you up.
Look at what happened in Sydney - the anti-terror cops?! These people are having us on. And they reckon they can, cos what has our response been so far? I am not asking anyone to sacrifice themselves for anything. If you guys want to be bullied into saying sorry and pleading guilty, that is definitely your personal choice, I suppose. I just think there are better possibilities that we could talk about if we knew what the hell was going on on the legal side, and if we all had a discussion about this. Its about recognising that the law is indeed an ass, and that surely we have a critique that recognises that the only way we’re going to get our “justice” is if we make it difficult for the state to implement their version.
The email thread is a start.
Cheers
Liz
Comment by liz t — March 16, 2007 @ 1:07 am
liz i get it, but you did come of a bit smug. it is a case of them now and us later/soon… and that is a real distinction. the current main strategy of listening to the lawyers is a bad one, i hope this thread opens possibility, the threat of having your door kicked down is not the same situation as having had it kicked down. tread carefully all alot is at stake.
Comment by nup — March 16, 2007 @ 1:41 am
I’m a Maori women thats grown up with the systemic racism & criminalization of my peoples so don’t give me a lecture aye, about a police state.The legs that support my arse stand on stolen Aboriginal land anyway.
Hope to korero (talk) with you tonight.
Love and support to everyone out there, who maybe cant participate in forums as this cause the man’s still got their computer.
Dedicated to all those who resist.
Bob Marley Rebel Music
http://youtube.com/watch?v=OS4Rnf8CwtI
Comment by Ana — March 16, 2007 @ 3:34 am
Well sorry but i’d have a letter with a few angry things to say in reply to all this too but now i’m gonna be in Melb on Tuesday hopefully i can talk with people. But don’t expect me to be at the rally out front.
Firstly i do agree with some of the sentiment of the open letter. The last paragraph in particular. Arrestees should get in touch. There’s not many times when you faced with the full shit of the system that there’s so many people willing to support.
The most important thing in all this is that the arrestees get off. That is what the campaign should be aimed at. Even before i became particularly tied up in all of this i had serious concerns from the statements that this was the case.
What has really got me pissed about all this is the talk around whether people are running a political case or not. I will make certain decisions when i know more and if anyone tells me i’m not being ‘political’ i will verbally rip their heads off. Additionally in the assumption that by only following what y’all have decided are people being political
it has pretty much shown that the agenda for this campaign is set.
I don’t blame people for that. The Solidarity Network got it’s shit together very quickly in a difficult situation. That was important. But unfortunately there seems now to be a fairly unchangeable vanguardist tendency that is getting some (fairly inconsequential) media and as a result media statements are being thrown out like their going out of fashion.
If people have decided that the political agenda of fighting further police repression is more important than the solidarity side then y’all should change name. I obviously agree fighting police repression is important but that isn’t the same as solidarity with the arrestees, especially if you’re forcing people to distance themselves because they aren’t taking on a particular version of being ‘political’. Again i know that people have done a lot of solid support stuff for arrestees, but unfortunately for many of us that has to be separate from the politics.
It’s very early for many of us we’ve got months of this to go. And on that point it is shoddy to try to make people decide how they’re going to run their cases before we’ve even received a brief of evidence. Once that happens i will suppport all arrestees who choose to be as pramatic as possible in getting off. And i will strongly defend that as a political choice with anyone who chooses to take it up with me.
This is where i’ll add that i’m not new to being arrested or having an early morning knock on the door from the cops. In a similar situation previously i took the lawyers advice over the solidarity campaign’s and i was bloody grateful for it.In our lives we constantly navigate a line between wanting to be outside the system and being forced back in. This is a really odd time to ask the arrestee’s to choose absolutely to not compromise ourselves. Please give me a recent example of a public political campaign getting someone (a protester especially) off.
And here’s my harshest point. Even if i could i would not be involved in the political campaign as it stands. The politics being articulated are shit. Civil liberties and right to protest. Who for? And why are we pleading that we are legitimate? Who wants that? Why don’t you just get Thomas Kenneally to say that protest is the birthright of Australians as he did out the front of my previous court case. Too bad for all of us born outside Australia then.
This liberal democracy line is bullshit. There’s an opportunity here to run a campaign that doesn’t back down the politics, but it seems like too many people are watering it down (or maybe they are just liberals at heart) just to get a media bite. I’d put more trust in a lawyer that takes on my case being helpful than i ever would in the media being useful to us.
Yes, running a campaign with politics that aren’t watered down would mean it has to be separate from direct solidarity stuff with the arrestees but as i’ve already said that isn’t necessarily a problem as long as no-one tries t talk on behalf of us. It’s not like the current campaign is being run with a heap of input from the arretsed.
If it became possible arrestees could decide for themselves if they wanted to be in the political side of things without fearing that what’s at stake is losing the suppport of the solidarity network. But at the moment i’m not, and i imagine many others don’t feel in the headspace to really take that on.
Fuck martyrdom and fuck Che.
Comment by Vk — March 17, 2007 @ 5:44 am
Woah, i just realised how long that was. Seeings i spent much longer than i expected and my simple reply basically became what i’d been meaning to write for ages can this go on the front of the blog?
Comment by Vk — March 17, 2007 @ 5:46 am