Civil liberties suffered, yet Black Block weenies could still riot. Two stories that caught my eye from Toronto, that show how ridiculous police repression and misrepresentation has become. Before the G20 meeting it had been announced that not just the places the great and good would meet would out of bounds, not just the security fence supposed to protect it, but that anywhere within a radius of five metres from the fence would be verboten. Walk close to the fence and you could be arrested without course, based on an old World War II era law supposed to deal with enemy sabotage. Funny thing is, this widely announced five metre rule did not exist:
The rule seemed straightforward when the news broke last Friday that the Ontario government made a regulatory change to a little-known act in secret.
Come within five metres of the summit security fence and you’d better have some identification or risk arrest.
The temporary regulation, which was passed in secret June 2, did decree that all streets and sidewalks inside the fence were a public work until 11:59 p.m. Monday. Under the Ontario Public Works Protection Act, that allowed police to search people trying to enter that area.
But there was no power to search people coming within five metres of the fence, said ministry spokeswoman Laura Blondeau.
“The area designated by the regulation as a public work does not extend outside the boundary of the fence,” Ms. Blondeau said.
Asked Tuesday if there actually was a five-metre rule given the ministry’s clarification, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair smiled and said, “No, but I was trying to keep the criminals out.”
In the grand scheme of things this may sound like only a little fib, compared to all the other security measures in place for the G20, the ones that were legal. However, it does show how easy it is for any police force to go beyond the already over broad powers handed to them by a compliant government and parliament. It’s not just Canada either, as this story of a young photographer being arrested for taking pictures of an army cadet parade in Romford shows. Again it shows police officers making up laws to attack behaviour they disagree with or find suspicious without it being actually illegal.
Back to the G20. Despite the intense security measures and the hordes of police on the streets, the socalled Black Bloc “activists” still managed to rampage through the city without consequences, as the eyewitness account in the video below shows.
While violent wankers got no hindrance from the police, unrelated proper peaceful demonstrators were attacked and afterwards the “threat” they presented was monstrously inflated:
Chief Bill Blair, who told reporters the items were evidence of the protesters’ intent, singled out arrows covered in sports socks, which he said were designed to be dipped in a flammable liquid and set ablaze.
However, the arrows belong to Brian Barrett, a 25-year-old landscaper who was heading to a role-playing fantasy game when he was stopped at Union Station on Saturday morning. Police took his jousting gear but let Mr. Barrett go, saying it was a case of bad timing.
In addition to the arrows – which Mr. Barrett made safe for live-action role playing by cutting off the pointy ends and attaching a bit of pool noodle covered in socks – police displayed his metal body armour, foam shields and several clubs made of plastic tubing covered with foam and fabric.
That’s right, the “weapons” above where from some poor LARPer, Live Action Role Player caught up in the G20 circus! Ridiculous but evidence again for how much police forces will lie to justify their actions. As said, this is something that’s ingrained in many if not most police officers, but it also serves a higher, more political goal. The story about the G20 protests thanks to this strategy of stringent security, threat inflation and police repression has never been about the merits of the protests, but only about whether all these precautions were needed and if the police didn’t go too far. It has become a law and order story, rather than a political one.
Robert
July 1, 2010 at 6:12 pmThe Public Works Act actually includes the “approach” to a public work as well as the work itself. If the courts had chosen to interpret 5m as an approach to the fence (on the grounds that there was no other reason to be so close) then the Act would in fact apply.
What you may not realize is that Toronto was picked because the neocons currently ruling the country have a grudge to settle with the city. Petty and vindictive pretty much sum up the policies of the present government…
Martin Wisse
July 2, 2010 at 10:36 amI see. Somehow I’m not surprised that this would be the motivation behind getting the G20 there..
Jenny
July 2, 2010 at 6:00 pmThere’s this too which I agree with:
http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/blog/oshipeya/3966
Although I don’t like the black bloc either