Sunday, April 19, 2009

ecoterrorists and thought crime - part 2

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Henry Porter has come out, guns blazing, against the government's Orwellian authoritarian policing of environmental activists on the one hand and their mealy-mouthed advocacy of the same. I implore anyone reading this to go and read this article as it is damning of the hypocrisy of our government.

"We are now in a crisis of moral or perhaps deep psychic inconsistency, with a government that in one half of its brain desires good PR on climate change but in the other half seethes with the authoritarian desire to stamp out an impertinent challenge to its record of inactivity."

The joint parliamentary committee on human rights said on the policing of the protests:

"Whilst protests may be disruptive or inconvenient, the presumption should be in favour of protests taking place without state interference."

"Human rights law makes clear that the balance should always fall in favour of those seeking to assert their right to protest, unless there is string evidence for interfering with their right."




Addition 25/04/09:

I just came across this letter to the Graun from a Senior Lecturer in Law. Its pretty damning of the police and the government's philosophy of pre-emptive arrest.

"In his letter (18 March) the assistant chief constable states it is "better to prevent criminality than to deal with its consequences". That sort of thinking was unanimously rejected by the House of Lords in 2006 in the context of breach of the peace. . . . It would be a great intrusion on the right to protest were police, under the guise of stop and search, to undermine the ruling that violence or a disturbance must be imminent before the police can take preventive action."

No comments:

Post a Comment

Feel free to share your opinions of my opinions. Oh- and cocking fuckmouse.