Largest Injunction since the Miners Strike for Climate Camp?
Whilst the state watching your every move is disconcerting, and potentially threatening, it's when they start actually taking away your liberties that people get really mad.In what is potentially the largest court injunction since the miners strikes, BAA is planning to take out an injunction (Guardian article) against members of such radical organisations as:
The Campaign to Protect Rural England
The Natural Trust
The Woodland Trust
Greenpeace
Friends of the Earth
AirportWatch
This is in order to prevent there members from making it to The Camp For Climate Action
I was informed about this, and a protest, via email...
----------------------------------------------------------
There will be a party on the Piccadilly line on Tuesday 31st July. Meet 7pm at Piccadilly Circus and catch the Southbound train. Everyone welcome
Bring music, small sound systems, balloons, funny hats, your drinks of choice, and a sense of fun. Oh and bring lots of friends
On Wednesday anywhere up to one million Londoners, may be banned from using the Piccadilly line in an injunction taken out by BAA (The British Airports Authority) See http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/jul/27/climatechange
That could well includes you
The injunction is designed to prevent ordinary people attending this year’s climate camp, a fun, peaceful week of workshops and talks about climate change. See http://www.climatecamp.org.uk/
This may be your last chance to party on the Piccadilly line, so let’s make a night of it!
If you are on Facebook then please tell us you’re coming. See http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=3256256327
And please invite all your friends, friends on facebook, friends in local groups you belong to, friends from everywhere.
Finally please email this to everyone you know who likes London, who believes in freedom of speech and who like to party.
Labels: climate camp, uk grass-roots activism
Home
del.icio.us
Digg This!
posted by Calvin Jones @ 10:05 PM
1 comments
1 Comments:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/this_britain/article2809171.ece
27 July 2007 00:57
Heathrow puts up legal barricades to keep away protesters
If you're a member of the National Trust, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust
or Friends of the Earth, then you could be banned from Britain's
biggest airport. And the Piccadilly line. And parts of Paddington
station. And sections of the M4. All because the authorities want to
halt a protest against climate change...
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Published: 27 July 2007
Five million people in peaceful environmental organisations such as
the National Trust and the RSPB have become the subject of an
extraordinary legal attempt to limit their right to protest.
In legal documents seen by The Independent, the British Airports
Authority has begun moves that would allow police to arrest members of
15 environmental groups to prevent them taking part in demonstrations
against airport expansion.
While the threat of terrorism and consequent security checks have been
dominating the headlines during the start of the summer holidays, BAA
has been planning a pre-emptive strike against environmentalists.
Next week, in response to a demonstration due to be held outside
Heathrow airport, BAA will go to the High Court to seek judicial
approval for an anti-environmentalist injunction, the terms of which
are so wide they have provoked astonishment among the green movement.
Any one of five million people in groups such as the Campaign for the
Protection of Rural England could be arrested for travelling on the
London Underground or possessing a kite.
Anyone failing to give 24 hours' notice of a protest could be arrested
for travelling on sections of the motorway or from standing on
platforms 6 and 7 at Paddington station to catch the Heathrow Express.
The terms of the injunction would cover: "All railway trains and
carriages operating upon the Piccadilly line of the London Underground
System ; the M4 and all service stations between and including
junctions 3 and 6; and the M25 and all service stations between and
including junctions 13 and 15..."
Civil rights campaigners claim the injunction, which will be heard on
Wednesday, would put new limits on the right to peaceful protest.
Liberty described the "massively wide ban" - which has no time limit -
as ridiculously unenforceable. "The dangerous and undemocratic trend
of large corporations seeking to trample the legal right to peaceful
protest should be taken very seriously by the courts," the human
rights group protested.
BAA insisted it had a duty to protect the travelling public from
disruption during the holiday season and was not seeking to prevent
legal protest. As part of the second annual Camp for Climate Action,
up to 5,000 protesters were to pitch tents for a week at or near
Heathrow from 14 August in protest at plans for a third runway that
would increase flights by 50 per cent. A day of peaceful direct
action, such as occupying an airline office, was planned but
organisers have promised not to compromise safety or inconvenience
passengers.
On Monday, BAA served an injunction on four protest leaders: Joss
Garman from Camp for Climate Action and Plane Stupid; Leo Murray, of
Plane Stupid; Geraldine Nicholson, of the Heathrow campaign group No
Third Runway Action Group; and John Stewart, of Hacan and
AirportWatch, an umbrella group of 10 environmental groups such as the
RSPB, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the National Trust, whose
members total more than five million people. Members of all the groups
would be banned from setting up a camp at or in the vicinity of
Heathrow and from carrying items including spades, saws, ropes,
cables, aerosol cans, balloons, whistles and loudhailers.
The protesters would be allowed to gather at three protest points on
the outskirts of the airport providing they did not exceed an as yet
unspecified number, and gave their names, car registration plates and
advance notice. They would not be allowed to use any megaphones,
klaxons or sirens or go within 100 metres of any airport operation.
BAA said in a statement: "During the summer holiday period up to
200,000 people pass through Heathrow daily... These people would
suffer as a result of any unlawful or irresponsible behaviour aimed at
disrupting the smooth operation of the airport."
Mr Garman said that he was "stunned" at the breadth of the injunction.
"It seems that having totally lost the argument on climate change they
are resorting to bullying tactics. It is by far the biggest crackdown
on civil liberties we have seen in terms of peaceful protest.
Martin Harper of the RSPB said: "It does seem extraordinary at a time
when half of the country is knee deep in flood water and the
Government is bringing forward legislation to tackle climate change
that BAA is having to resort to bullying tactics to halt protests."
Why the airport has become a target
Activists are targeting Heathrow because of the threat posed to new
climate-change targets by the planned expansion of airports
nationwide. They believe the protests can influence aviation policy in
the same way that the Newbury bypass protests in 1996 led to Labour
calling a halt to the building of more roads.
At stake is the future of the world's busiest international airport.
Heathrow currently has a limit of 480,000 flights a year. Allowing
both existing runways to handle take-offs and landings and building a
third runway could take that to 800,000 flights. Twelve local
authorities in west London have formed the 2M group to oppose the
plans which they say will leave a "constant rumble" over the homes of
people in Kensington & Chelsea, Fulham, Richmond, Kingston and other
areas. Members of the NoTRAG and Hacan Clearskies campaigning groups
are also fighting the proposals.
The Government argues airport expansion is necessary to ensure
continued economic growth. According to a study by Oxford Economic
Forecasting last month, the planned airport expansion will increase
GDP by £13bn by 2030, outweighing "climate change costs". A third
runway would demolish the village of Sipson and part of Harmondsworth.
Bryan Sobey, 78, president of the Harmondsworth and Sipson Residents'
Association, said: "It's a bit like ethnic cleansing without the guns.
It will take an entire village and part of another village out of
existence completely."
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/jul/27/climatechange
Catch-all Heathrow protest injunction could bar millions
· Climate activists fight legal move by BAA
· Met chief warns of disruption for travellers
* John Vidal and Dan Milmo
* The Guardian
* Friday July 27 2007
Heathrow airport is targeting climate change activists with a sweeping
injunction which could prevent members of the RSPB and the National
Trust, plus millions more affiliated to environmental organisations,
from attending a green protest.
The airport's owner, BAA, said it wants to minimise disruption when
the Camp for Climate Action is held there from August 14 to 21. The
Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, gave warning
yesterday that disruption to the airport was likely.
BAA named three individuals on the application as well as "members and
supporters" of Airport Watch, a coalition of environment groups which
together total nearly 5 million members.
Under the injunction, a ban on approaching the airport would cover
National Trust, Woodland Trust and RSPB supporters, as well as members
of Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the Campaign to Protect Rural
England. The case will be heard next Wednesday.
"This could stop millions of people who are members of these groups
going to Heathrow," said Kate Harrison of Matrix chambers, who will be
representing some of the people and groups named on the injunction.
"The judge will have to decide whether it applies to all the
individual members of the groups. You have to go back to the miners'
strike [in the 1980s] to find an injunction on this scale." Green
groups are working together to challenge the injunction.
Despite assurances from camp organisers that no one would try to
occupy runways or go "airside", the company said yesterday that it
feared disruption. "We are throwing the net very wide to make sure the
airport can operate securely," said a BAA spokesman. "People have
rights to protest but people also have the right to go on holiday,
too.
"The intention is not to stop protest or to withhold people's rights
in any way. Legally, if you take it to its very extreme, it does mean
that people cannot go to the airport to protest. But that is not
realistic."
Sir Ian said the protest could be very disruptive. "It will require a
very large number of officers to deliver it. The Met is quite capable
of delivering those officers. We have been working our way through
what we need and we will provide it ... But it is likely there will be
some disruption at Heathrow," he said.
After the terror attack on Glasgow airport, police are concerned about
the camp and have been stepping up security. "You would be very silly
indeed to try to breach the security of a British airport in any way,"
said one airport source yesterday.
The application for the injunction, seen by the Guardian, covers
airport land, local villages, named areas in and around London
including Paddington station, the Heathrow Express, which is owned by
BAA, the Piccadilly line on the London Underground, and stretches of
the M4 and M25. In theory, say protesters, it would cover the Prince
of Wales, who is president of the National Trust, and celebrities who
have worked with groups trying to stop the airport expanding.
"This is corporate bullying, designed to shut down peaceful protest,"
said John Stewart of Hacan, a local group named in the BAA injunction.
"Local people are furious."
Heathrow has been targeted by climate change campaigners as the
government prepares to start the formal process of building a third
runway. The runway is backed by ministers, airlines and business
leaders but opposed by local residents and green activists, who say
expansion will contravene environmental policy.
Up to 1,000 protesters and locals are expected to attend the camp at a
site to be announced. The peaceful protest is expected to attract
scientists, students and church organisations concerned about
aviation's role in climate change. One day has been set aside for
"direct action".
=x=x=x=x=x=x=x=
http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/climate/aviation-industry-takes-the-queen-five-million-brits-and-itself-to-court-20070726
Aviation industry takes five million people to court
Posted by bex on 26 July 2007.
Planes on the runway
Here's a doozy for you: on Wednesday, the aviation industry is taking
five million people - including a lot of their own staff - to court.
If you're a member or supporter of a group that's concerned about
climate change, the chances are you're a defendant too.
The industry seems to want to ban five million of us from Heathrow and
all routes to the airport, including the Piccadilly line, parts of the
rail network, and sections of the M25 and M4.
In three weeks' time, the Camp for Climate Action is due to gather
near Heathrow to peacefully protest against Heathrow's vast
contribution to climate change (the airport's planes emit more
greenhouse gases than many individual countries) and its planned third
runway expansion.
The owner of Heathrow, the British Airports Authority (BAA), seems to
be, frankly, terrified.
It's seeking an injunction, which names as defendants "all persons
acting as members, participants or supporters" of anti-aviation group
Plane Stupid, anti-noise group HACAN and AirportWatch. The injunction
is to stop people from setting foot on Heathrow and "the arterial
infrastructure serving" it.
So far, so good. Just another example of the aviation industry's
corporate bullying, albeit a draconian one.
But the interesting bit is that AirportWatch, named on the injunction,
is just an umbrella organisation. Its member organisations include the
National Trust, the RSPB, the Woodland Trust, the Campaign for the
Protection of Rural England, Transport 2000, Friends of the Earth and
Greenpeace, among many others.
The combined supporter base of these organisations is well over five
million people.
And it includes the Queen, patron of the RSBP and CPRE. Prince
Charles, president of the National Trust, would also be banned from
Heathrow and its surrounds - as would Imran Khan and Shane Warne, who
recently fund-raised for HACAN.
Even more bizarrely, the injunction covers many of BAA's own staff.
Their 2006 Corporate Responsibility report (pdf) tells us that BAA
sent its airport staff to the RSPB nature reserve at Lochwinnoch
"where they spent the day building nest boxes for the native bird
population". Which seems to me to fit the description of "persons
acting as members, participants or supporters".
When we got the news, after sitting around open-mouthed for a bit, we
suspected that BAA didn't know who or what AirportWatch was; they'd
panicked, we thought. Hadn't done their research.
But 'a source' who's spoken to BAA has just told us that BAA is
deliberately making the ban as broad as possible, and leaving it up to
the police to apply it with common sense. Which means, if BAA wins,
the police will have the right to stop you, me or Her Maj from, say,
getting on "all railway trains and carriages operating upon the
Piccadilly line"...
I've been trying to get hold of an electronic copy of the injunction
for all the defendants out there but I've had no luck so far (the
version delivered was so large it filled four ring-binders). If I
manage, I'll post it here.
Take action!
If you're not one of the defendants and are feeling a bit left out,
feel free to show a bit of solidarity; just sign up to a green
organisation of your choice. If we can get another five million people
banned from Heathrow, BAA might find it doesn't need its third runway
after all... In fact, they could solve all their problems of lost
luggage, queues and general chaos while they're at it.
jo.
+44 77 17 22 13 96
http://www.workface.org
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/climate-energy
Post a Comment
<< Home