[statewatch]
–
to "prevent individuals or groups who are considered
to pose a potential threat to the maintenance of public law and
order and/or security from travelling to the location of the
event"
– and to put in place: "The necessary arrangements
for a quick and efficient implementation of the potential expulsion
measures"
–
EU
Security Handbook: "The scope of the manual is now such
that it applies to the security (both from a public order point
of view as well as counter-terrorism) of all major international
events, be it political, sporting, social, cultural or other."
At the Article 36 Committee meeting
(high-level EU interior ministry officials) on 22-23 October
2007 a proposal from the German government was on the agenda
concerning the options for "sharing information on violent
troublemakers at large events" (EU
doc no: 15079/07). It was agreed that the Council’s
(the governments) working party on the SIS/SIRENE (Schengen Information
System) should examine the possibility of "using the
SIS for this exchange of information".
On 4 December 2007 under
the heading: "Troublemakers" at the SIS/SIRENE
Working Party:
"The Presidency
explained that at its meeting on 22 and 23 October 2007, CATS
had instructed the SIS/SIRENE group to examine the possibility
of using SIS for the exchange of information on troublemakers.COM argued that although the alerts pursuant to Article 99 were
not designed to this end, this kind of alerts could prove helpful
in locating troublemakers.However, some delegations
argued that this type of alerts neither met the legal (Art. 99
regards extremely serious criminal offences or serious threats)
nor the operational needs (there was no possibility of arresting
persons) referred to by CATS.Since this question had already been discussed some years previously
in this forum, the Council Secretariat was asked to retrieve
any documents issued between 2000 and 2003 on this subject."
(EU doc no: 16585/07)
Article 99 (for the SIS)
concerns the surveillance of people suspected of extremely serious
criminal offences. See: Schengen
Information System Article 99 report
On 14 March 2008 the Council
Presidency circulated a paper to the SIS/SIRENE Working Party
on the Subject of:
"Troublemakers"
(EU
doc 7544/08)
The paper refers to the
Conclusions of the special Justice and Home Affairs Council on
13 July 2001 (EU doc
no: 10916/01) following the Gothenburg protests on 14-16
June 2001) and to Conclusions on the development of SIS II (EU
doc no: EU doc
9808/03) where "a certain interest exists"
in a new category in the SIS on "violent troublemakers".
These Conclusions also referred to the need for a "feasibility
study" (which has not been done) and for Council working
parties to discuss the issue and bring foward proposals "when
they find sufficient support". The only indirectly related
development was the Council Resolution on security at European
Council meetings and other comparable events on 3 November 2003,
See: EU
doc no: 13815/03
In effect four and a half
years past before "troublemakers" were put back on
the agenda again by the German government in October 2007 in
the wake of the Heiligendamm G8 Summit (see below).
The Council Presidency
paper says that the SIS/SIRENE Working Party discussed the issue
on 29 January 2008 (though no "Outcomes"/Minutes of
this meeting have yet been produced) and:
"several delegations
reflected the idea that the persons enviaged could be inserted
under Article 99. Other delegations raised doubts about the usefulness
of Article 99 alerts for violent troublemakers since arrest cannot
be carried out under this Article."
The Presidency paper says
that data would concern:
"persons to be
barred from certain events, such as European summits or similar
venues, international sports or cultural events or other mass
gatherings because they are a threat to public order and public
security at such events."
But:
"This proposal
begs questions as the right of free movement, other civil liberties
and data protection, as these persons should therefore not be
permanently visible or included in the SIS, requiring a very
careful management of such alerts."
On 18 March 2008 at the
SIS/SIRENE Working Party, under the heading: Troublemakers
the above document was discussed and:
"After some discussion,
it was concluded that before undertaking any feasibility study
as referred to in the Annex to the Council Conclusions on SIS
II (7178/4/03 REV 4 SIRIS 28 CATS 16 ASIM 16 COMIX 141, point
II.2, page 6) on the possible creation of a new type of SIS-alert,
attention should be given to the definition of “troublemakers”
and the exact goals. To that end, the Presidency of the SIS/SIRENE
WP would establish contacts with the Presidency of the WP on
Police Cooperation."
German government Note
So
on 7 April 2008 the German delegation – who raised the issue
– circulated a Note on: "Improving exchange of information
on violent offenders active internationally" (EU
doc no: 8204/08). This might have been expected to clarify
exactly who is a "troublemaker" at "mass events"/International
gatherings in the EU – instead the German delegation Note widens
the scope to cover:
"violent offenders
active internationally"
which apparently covers
"violent offenders" (does this mean convicted?)
or "violent troublemakers".
The Note states that in
Germany it is permissible to enter an alert to "prevent
violent confrontations and other criminal offences" at major
international political or sporting events and to:
"avert dangers
arising from gatherings of individuals prone to violence"
Given the German police
reaction to the Heilgendamm G8 Summit 6-8 June 2007 (See Statewatch
report: Heiligendamm
G8 Summit: a chronology of protest and represssion) it
would appear that any protest can be defined as "gatherings
of individuals prone to violence".
"Alerts" are
entered on people on
"whom certain
facts give reason to believe that they will in future commit
significant criminal offences using violence or the threat of
violence. A "significant criminal offence" is one which
falls into a category higher than that of petty crime, noticeably
disturbs the public peace and is likely to have a considerable
effect on the public’s sense of security."
To define "significant
criminal offence" to include one that "disturbs
the public peace" is absurdly wide – this would include
non-violent protesters sitting down in the street. And any large-scale
gathering to protest could be interpreted by police as having
"a considerable effect on the public’s sense of security".
Apparently "concrete
grounds" for a "negative prognosis"
are:
"the individual
concerned has been suspected, accused or convicted of a significant
criminal offence."
"Suspected"
by whom?
"Accused" by
whom?
Moreover alerts can be
entered against a person from whom "weapons or other
dangerous objects have been seized or confiscated" –
again this depends on how it is interpreted as banner poles are
seized by police on the grounds that they could be used a weapons.
The German delegation
Note then goes on to maasively extend the scope of the proposal.
We are given examples
of "significant criminal offences" which include:
"(a) Offences
involving use of force against – life and limb
(b) coercion
(c) aiding and abetting the escape of a prisoner
(d) material damage to property
(e) serious trespass
(f) breach of the public peace
(g) formation of or participation in an armed group
(h) formation of or support for a criminal or terrorist organisation
(i) robbery
(j) arson
(k) causing an explosion
(l) breach of the laws on weapons
(m) incitement to hatred (insofar as the nature of the act clearly
shows that the perpetrator is liable to be violent)"
Are "armed groups"
and "terrorist organisations" to be defined as "troublemakers"?
What do "coercion",
"aiding and abetting the escape of a prisoner",
"robbery", "arson" and "causing an explosion"
have to do with protests at major international meetings in the
EU?
This is a dangerous conflation
of questionable offences (depending on the context) which might
arise at protests such as "breach of the public peace"
or "serious trespass" with clearly criminal
and terrorist acts endangering life and limb.
Back to 2001-2003
The
idea of putting "troublemakers" on a database was discussed
and rejected back in 2001. It is often forgotten in the wake
of 11 September 2001 that the EU was in a "crisis"
earlier in the summer of 2001 following the mass protests in
Gothenburg at the EU Summit on 14-16 June – See for full background
Statewatch’s Observatory
on protests in the EU A special meeting of the Justice
and Home Affairs Council was called on 13 July 2001 from which
emanated Conclusions
adopted by the Council and the representatives of the Governments
of the Member States on 13 July 2001 on security at meetings
of the European Council and other comparable events (pdf).
Amongst it conclusions were the:
"use of police
or intelligence officers able to identify persons or groups likely
to pose a threat to public order and security, provided by the
Member States from which such persons or groups come"
No sooner was the ink
dry and there were mass protests at the EU Summit in Genoa (19-22
July 2001) during which Carlo Guillani was killed. See: Genoa
19-21 July 2001: An Italian view of "public order policing"
Italian style: 482 people injured; 280 arrests; 2,093
people turned back at the borders; Carlo Giuliani shot dead by
police. See also: EU plans
to extend the Schengen Information System (SIS) and The Enemy Within II
(pdf).
During
the discussions on the specially called Justice and Home Affairs
Council (JHA) after protests in the EU Summit in Gothenburg,
Sweden on 14-16 June 2001 when hundreds were arrested and excessive
police reaction widely reported: Statewatch’s
Observatory on protests
in the EU
See Gothenburg: Public
order policing in Europe – policy backlash expected:EU
public order)
it emerged that seven EU governments – Germany, Sweden, Portugal,
Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom – wanted to
go even further and create an explicit EU-wide database of “troublemakers
” and to introduce travel bans on suspected “troublemakers
” across the EU. See Statewatch analysis The
Enemy Within
(pdf)
Later
in the autumn of 2001 the German government put forward a Proposal
to create EU para-military police units to counter protests:
Report
Policing of demonstrations
2003-2008
Since 2001 there have been many protest
and demonstrations at which there has been a discernable shift
in the aggressiveness of polcing tactics which is a reflection
of both the growth in para-military policing and the conflation
in EU ideology of security to deal with terrorism and public
order policing.
In 2007
the Council of the European Union (representing the 27 governments)
agreed that the two, separete handbooks on public order at EU
events and that on counter-terrorism should be combined:
"The
scope of the manual is now such that it applies to the security
(both from a public order point of view as well as counter-terrorism)
of all major international events, be it political, sporting,
social, cultural or other."
As regards
public order and cross-border demonstrations, the agencies should:
"prevent
individuals or groups who are considered to pose a potential
threat to the maintenance of public law and order and/or security
from travelling to the location of the event"
and for
those who have entered make:
"The
necessary arrangements for a quick and efficient implementation
of the potential expulsion measures"
Source:
Security
handbook for the use of police authorities and other agencies
at international events
Here
are some examples from the last five years of the policing of
protests:
2003:
Greece: The
"Soloniki 8" and Simon Chapman
2003: Spain: Legal
action against policing of demonstrations
2004:
UK: Fairford
coach: Protestors "virtually prisoners" rules Court
of Appeal
2005:
UK-G8: Gleneagles: Statement
on the Policing of the G8 Protests (indymedia, link)
2006:
Spain:
59 held after demonstration against detention centres
2006: Swiss
Police face jail for Nearly Killing Two Activists in Evian 2003
2007: After the Heilgendamm
G8 Summit in June 2007 the G6 group of EU states (France, Germany,
Italy, Poland, Spain and the UK meeting in Poland issued a: Joint
Declaration by the Ministers of Interior of G6 States Sopot,
18 October 2007"acts of violence" at "mass
events" which affected the "security of participants"
and want to "continue the discussion" on "providing
security and public order". See Statewatch report: Heiligendamm
G8 Summit: a chronology of protest and represssion
2008: Policing
protests in Switzerland, Italy and Germany (from Statewatch
bulletin) 1. Switzerland:
Policing of the anti-WEF demonstration in Davos; 2. Italy: Demonstrators
convicted for G8 clashes; 3.
Switzerland: 200 arrests at peaceful street party; 4. Germany:
60 per cent of G8 investigations dropped.
2008: ROMANIA-NATO:
Police actions against anti-NATO protests in Bucharest
On 2 April 2008, hundreds of police raided the convergence centre
of the anti-NATO gathering in Bucharest and arrested an estimated
46 people. All the arrests were made inside the convergence centre,
no demonstration was taking place at the time. Many police reportedly
wore ski masks and were hostile to journalists trying to access
the scene. Police arrested and detained people arbitrarily. Once
detained, the police appear to construct "offences",
such as interpreting the carrying of a pocket-knife as arms possessions.
The detained are interrogated, photographed and fingerprinted
in police stations, and held for up to 24 hours. At the Romanian
border several groups of activists have been denied entry into
the country. including a direct reference to the mass
protests at the G8 Heiligendamm Summit earlier this year. G6
refers to the
Sources:
Indymedia
report in English: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/04/02/18490151.php
Indymedia report in German: http://de.indymedia.org/2008/04/212209.shtml
English summary: http://gipfelsoli.org/Home/Bukarest_2008/4906.html
Indymedia Romania
Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor, comments:
"We
can now see a pattern emerging across the EU where people who
exercise their democratic right to attend cross border protests
are confronted by aggressive para-military policing, surveillance,
preventive detention and expulsion.This
is a reflection of the EU’s definition of "security"
at international events which is now defined as covering both
"counter-terrorism" and "public order".Back in 2003 the bilateral
exchange of information on "suspected troublemakers"
between EU states for international events was agreed. What is
proposed now is not the one-off exchange of information related
to a specific event but a permanent EU-wide database of suspected
"troublemakers", this is utterly unacceptable in
a democratic Europe."
Source: http://www.statewatch.org/news/2008/apr/04eu-troublemakers.htm
