Asia-Pacific, Civil Society, Development & Aid, Global, Global Geopolitics, Headlines, Human Rights

AUSTRALIA: APEC Security Over the Top – Activists

Stephen de Tarczynski

MELBOURNE, Sep 5 2007 (IPS) - Activists and civil libertarians say that security measures put in place for the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum – currently being held in Sydney and leading up to the weekend summit – are excessive and undermine democratic freedoms.

”The measures are unprecedented and they directly prohibit expressions of democratic freedom in the declared area,” Stephen Blanks, executive secretary of the New South Wales Council for Civil Liberties (NSWCCL), told IPS.

“It gives police the power to do anything they choose within the APEC declared area,” says Blanks.

Authorities have announced certain areas as APEC declared zones as part of an effort to minimise security threats, including terrorist attacks and violent protests.

Australia has seen violent clashes between protesters and police in the past, most recently at the G-20 summit in Melbourne in 2006.

Among the delegates at the APEC forum are the heads-of-state of the 21 members of APEC, including United States President George W. Bush – who will leave early to attend the 9/11 commemorations and prepare for the release of a critical progress report on Iraq – President Hu Jintao of China, and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Under legislation introduced for APEC, the 3,500-strong police force at the forum have great stop-and-search powers and can move people on within the APEC zones. The police will be backed-up by 1,500 Australian defence personnel.

While most pedestrians will be able to enter the declared zones – some people have been “blacklisted” as potential trouble-makers and will be refused entry – the presumption of bail will be denied to those arrested.

In addition, 200 weekend prisoners have been told to stay at home in order to free-up jail space.

Blanks sees this as an ominous sign. “I think it tells protesters that the police intend to be very heavy handed,” he says.

The police will, if need be, use water cannon to disperse crowds while a five km, concrete and steel security fence now rings major sites such as Circular Quay, as part of crowd control measures.

Australia’s navy will deploy special forces around Sydney Harbour while overhead surveillance will be taken care of by fighter jets and helicopters.

Jim Casey, from the New South Wales Fire Brigade Employees’ Union and spokesman for the Stop Bush Coalition – a group which is planning what is expected to be the largest protest during the APEC forum – describes the security measures as excessive and unnecessary.

“The existing laws allow the police to actually keep control of the demonstration without needing to go to these constraints,” he says.

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court upheld an application by the police to move the route of the Stop Bush Coalition’s protest, scheduled for Sep. 8, away from the declared APEC zone.

The protesters had planned to march along Martin Place, where the U.S. consulate is located, but the court ruled that the group must follow another route – the one suggested by police.

Casey told IPS that the group was committed to a peaceful protest and that the route proposed by the coalition – which plans to march against global warming, in defence of workers’ rights and for Australia to withdraw its troops from Iraq – would not have engaged with any of the APEC delegates. “It doesn’t go near any of the venues they’ll be staying in,” he says.

Casey also argues that to relate the threat of terrorist attack to peaceful protest goes too far. “For those issues to become loaded with the question of terror is something which I think is a little bit beyond the pale.’’

Stephen Blanks agrees. “Expressions of political opinion do not raise, inherently, public safety issues.”

“People can express political opinions in a safe way and people would like to express political opinions in a safe way inside the declared area,” says the NSWCCL Secretary.

He says that while security measures need to be taken, they should reflect the rights of the broader community as well.

“There do have to be appropriate measures in place but they should balance better the rights and freedoms of everybody in the community,” Blanks told IPS.

Dale Mills, from Human Rights Monitors (HRM) – a group of lawyers and law students who will “police the police” by collecting video, photographic and eyewitness evidence of police behaviour – says that “it’s understandable that extra security measures have been put in place because George W. Bush is visiting.”

But Mills argues that the beefed-up security is disproportionate to the threat. “I think the existing security measures have been over the top. They effectively ban protest,” he says.

“The laws are not just dealing with the potential terrorist threat but also seem to be aimed at combating all sorts of protest and that’s just unnecessary,” argues Mills.

“Having a protest up Martin Place is not a legitimate security concern, if by that you mean the possibility of a terrorist attack on a head of state and so the laws have just gone way over the top,” he says.

HRM, which has been active at demonstrations in Australia since 2002, will have around 30 members operating in pairs during the forum. Mills says that while 20 monitors will wear identification so that people can approach them regarding their legal rights, some will be operating “under cover.”

“(They) will just appear like ordinary people taking video evidence, again of the police and to make sure they don’t use excessive force or breach any of their guidelines,” says Mills.

He argues that it is necessary for the volunteers of HRM to undertake this work “because there’s insufficient scrutiny of the police already’’.

Mills says that the task of “policing the police” is vital during political protests such as the one planned by the Stop Bush Coalition. “It’s particularly important, generally, to make sure the police are accountable, but also especially important in relation to political protests,” he says.

Mills argues that allowing space different views is part of a healthy democratic society.

“When people engage in political protests, very often they’re espousing views which today are seen as minority views, but tomorrow they become the conventional wisdom.”