Within the last few years the strategies police use to control
activist events have changed dramatically. Massive pens divided
and contained protesters at the February 15, 2003 anti-war rally in New
York City. Hundreds of preemptive arrests took place at The Free Trade
Area of the Americas protest in Miami in 2003, and at this year's G8
Summit on Sea Island, Georgia, roughly 500 protesters were met by a
police and military force of nearly 25,000. Organizers of activist
events and marches at the Democratic and Republican National
Conventions are already running into road blocks as local officials
refuse to cooperate in the issuance of permits. These are just
some of the tactics being used to crack down on the right to dissent and
prevent protests before they start.
Heidi Boghosian is the Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild ( www.nlg.org),
and is the co-host of the civil liberties radio show "Law and Disorder"
on WBAI in New York. In this interview, Boghosian discusses how
police control of protests has changed since September 11th, what the
"Miami Model" entails, how the threat of terrorism is being used as an
excuse to clamp down on civil liberties, and what activists can do to
prevent and fight against such pressure.
BD: From what I've heard of the FTAA protests in Miami, and what I
saw at the G8 protests in Georgia, there seems to be a new police
strategy to chill dissent. Could you briefly describe this new strategy,
which some have called the "Miami Model"? How does it differ from
pre-September 11th protest control?
HB: Post-September 11 police strategies have institutionalized
several practices that were already beginning to take shape a few years
before and that imperil civil liberties for everyone in this
country. The Seattle City Council's World Trade Organization
Accountability Review Committee found that police and city leaders
abdicated their responsibility in planning for the WTO protests, a
failure that put people at risk and contributed to a violation of
protesters' constitutional rights. The general strategy includes using
unnecessary, excessive force on peaceful protesters (often without any
order to disperse or with an inaudible one, so that police can say that
people failed to obey their orders); pre-textual administrative searches
of organizers' planning headquarters, false or unlawful arrests of
large numbers of pea! ceful protesters which results in keeping them off
the streets for significant parts of demonstrations, denial of permits
or unnecessarily burdensome requirements to get permits (such as taking
out liability
insurance, which few can afford); sending messages to the public,
echoed in the media, that protesters are lawless and violent; erecting
containment pens to trap protesters into a confined space; using
motorcycles and bicycles to herd protesters, and passing event-specific
ordinances, as in Miami, which are usually found unconstitutional.
BD: How is the threat of terrorism being used by the police as an excuse to crack down on dissent?
HB: In times of war the government is often intolerant of the First
Amendment protections of speech. We now see a multi-level erosion
of protections that we've taken for granted, from the relaxing of
guidelines on domestic spying, to the questioning and infiltration of
meetings on college
campuses, to the announcement of former press secretary Ari Fleischer
to "watch what we say." The government sets the standard that any
kind of speech that challenges the administration's policies in any way
is subject to heightened scrutiny. That standard and memoranda
issued by the FBI to local law enforcement, signals to police that any
kind of speech that questions the government is potentially dangerous.
The passage of the USA PATRIOT Act includes a very broad definition of
"domestic terrorism," which can arguably appl! y to all acts of protest.
BD: What effect does this have on the locals where the protests are
taking place? Are they being harassed and intimidated as well?
HB: From what we saw at the G-8 Summit in Georgia, most of the
local residents resented the enormous military presence and the
intrusion of the military into their daily lives. They got to know
many of the protesters and were sympathetic to their wish to be able to
exercise their First Amendment right to engage in demonstrations and
rallies. The larger and more visible the presence of local and
federal law enforcement, often outnumbering protesters, often draws
attention to the fact that law enforcement is overreacting.
BD: Are preemptive arrests and the late issuance of permits new tactics?
HB: Late issuance of permits, as well as other requirements to get
permits, such as taking out liability insurance or even bond to pay for
police or related services, is definitely part of the new police
tactics. Late issuance makes protest planning nearly impossible
and has the effect of interrupting or stalling effective planning by
people traveling from out of town. Preemptive arrests are a large
part of the new police tactics. Most often, the arrests are not
based on probable cause and charges are ultimately dropped. Review
commissions around the country are starting to report on this tactic,
so it seems to be generally recognized as an attempt to disrupt the flow
of free speech.
BD: What police tactics do you expect at the Democratic and Republican National Conventions?
HD: We expect to see the same set of preemptive tactics that we've
witnessed in other major cities across the nation, and will take note of
any new tactics as well. We've already seen the delaying and
denying of permits and expect to see mass false arrests, raids of
organizing places, use of excessive force on peaceful protesters, and
use of the "rush" tactic that we saw in New York on February 15, 2003
where police rode horses into crowds.
BD: How much are these police tactics affecting activist turnout at
protests? Do you expect low turnouts at the DNC and the RNC?
HB: We expect large turnouts in both Boston and New York.
Despite the possibility of continued police suppression tactics, people
want to exercise their right to express their political views. The
Republican and Democratic Conventions are symbolic events at which to
do so.
BD: What is your advice to activists and organizers to help deal with and fight against these crack downs?
HB: First, know your basic rights and also become familiar with the
laws pertaining to protest in both cities -- a local Lawyers Guild
chapter or member can assist with this and there are many law
collectives around the country that conduct Know Your Rights
trainings. During the demonstration(s), write telephone numbers on
your person in case of an emergency (the National Lawyers Guild number
in New York City will be available in early to mid August) and make sure
that if you are arrested you have made an arrangement with a friend to
write down the location of the arrest, any identifying information about
the arresting officer, names and numbers of witnesses and any other
details that might prove helpful later on. Keeping detailed
information about any unlawful and unconstitutional police conduct is
important, es! pecially if you are seriously injured.
Benjamin Dangl is the editor of www.UpsideDownWorld.org, an online magazine about activism and politics. Heidi Boghosian is the Executive Director of the National Lawyers Guild.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted
material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the
copyright owner. NoNonsense English offers this material
non-commercially for research and educational purposes. I believe this
constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for
in 17 U.S.C ยง 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this
site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner, i.e. the media service or newspaper
which first published the article online and which is indicated at the
top of the article unless otherwise specified. |