ANALYSIS: By Wendy Bacon

Many who witnessed the horrific police violence in Sydney’s CBS on the evening of February 9 say they had never seen anything like it before.

After a week of broadcasts of police “kettling”, viciously assaulting and pepper spraying peaceful protesters, the NSW Law Enforcement Conduct Commission (LECC) announced an independent investigation into the police conduct.

It will examine the policing operation as well as individual cases of unlawful policing.

One of the matters LECC should investigate is which politicians and senior police were involved in organising a massive increase in available police powers shortly before Herzog’s arrival, and what instructions were given to police on the ground about those powers.

The legislation that was used is a little-known act called the Major Events Act 2009, under which the NSW Minister for Tourism, Stephen Kamper, approved a new regulation which transformed Herzog’s visit into a “major event”.

Major Events Act
The objects of the Act are to bring “benefits” to spectators and enhance NSW’s reputation for holding events. The Act grants special powers to plan and regulate major events, including shutting off access to areas, searching people, and using “reasonable force” to compel citizens to comply with directions.

It relieves the state of most liability for damage caused in the exercise of these powers.

The powers have the potential to severely impact the exercise of citizens’ political rights, which is probably why the Act includes a section that a political protest must not be declared a major event. The Act is designed to cover events of a “sporting, cultural or other nature”.

These police powers triggered the lack of restraint witnessed last Monday. This does not mean that police actions were lawful, but that these were the powers under which they thought they were acting.

As one constable who was part of two lines blocking protesters from entering Town Hall Square said when questioned, “I heard something about a major event.”

Court challenge failed
The new regulation was announced on Saturday, February 7, just 48 hours before Herzog arrived.

The Palestinian Action Group (PAG), represented by Hanna Legal, had 24 hours to challenge the regulation.

PAG’s case was that the regulation was “unreasonable”, “disproportionate” and was created for an improper purpose of suppressing protests. Within an hour of NSW Supreme Court Justice Robertson Wright dismissing the challenge, NSW Police were already using the Major Event powers.

Before dismissing the Palestinian Action Group challenge on Monday, Justice Wright said that he found both sides’ arguments persuasive and that it was difficult to decide. But there was no hint of uncertainty in his judgment, which adopted almost all of the NSW government’s case.

The judge, who is near retirement, was described on his appointment as “a soldier, a historian and a gentleman”. His reasons were not published until two days later.

By that time, protesters had been violently flung to the ground while praying, and hundreds had been trapped and assaulted in Town Hall Square. People were blinded or choked with pepper spray. Others had been hospitalised with broken limbs or bleeding wounds.

Journalist and filmmaker James Ricketson, 76, had been injured in an assault by six officers and held in a cell for five hours without water before being released without charge. Videos of NSW police punching people had gone viral around the world.

Premier Chris Minns, Minister for Police Yasmin Catley and Police Commissioner Mal Lanyon defended the police actions as “reasonable” in the circumstances.

Not a political event?
Few would disagree that Herzog’s visit to Australia was the key political event of last week. Yet key to the judgment was Wright’s determination that the Herzog visit wasn’t.

Before he arrived, Herzog defined the purpose of his visit as rebuilding Australia’s relationship with Israel. He brought a top-level delegation from Jewish national institutions with him. This was in evidence before the judge.

Also in evidence was the fact that Chris Sidoti, who had sat on a UN Commission of Inquiry that found Israel was committing genocide in Gaza and that Herzog had incited it, had called for his arrest in Australia.

But Justice Wright found that politics was not a “defining” or “dominant” purpose for the visit and that it was a “cultural event”.

Herzog’s tour did have cultural aspects, such as a trip to Bondi to meet victims of the December massacre and visits to a synagogue and school. But Herzog and Zionist leaders also consistently stressed that an important purpose was to encourage the Australian government to stand with Israel.

The act has never been used for a foreign dignitary visit before or at such short notice.

Until last week, no one would have imagined that this law would be used to enable police violence to be unleashed on peaceful citizens protesting against a controversial visit by a foreign head of state.

But a bright idea by the NSW Police changed this.

Police concerns
As public opposition to Herzog’s visit grew and likewise support for a peaceful march from Town Hall to Parliament House during Herzog’s visit, senior police became concerned that the new anti-protest law passed on December 23 might not be sufficient to stop a big march in Sydney.

The ban over most of the CBD and the Eastern Suburbs was extended on February 2. On the same day, according to evidence tendered in last week’s court case, NSW police advised the government that the Major Events Act, with its extensive powers, could help avoid any risks to Herzog during the visit, advising “Police will be empowered to address any behaviour which poses a security threat or risk to the Presidential Visit.”

It is worth noting that nothing was ever planned at the protest related to a security threat or risk to Herzog. That was also in evidence.

The Cabinet office then prepared a minute setting out arguments, including ones for and against protests, for the Minister for Tourism Kamper to consider before making his decision. He was then told to sign but not date his recommendation, which was agreed to by the NSW Executive Council and gazetted on Friday, February 6.

In arguing that the regulation had been declared for the improper purpose of suppressing protests, PAG’s barrister Felicity Graham relied on the timing of events and material in the Cabinet minute. She also relied on Premier Chris Minns’ media conference on Saturday, February 7, in which he announced the “Major Event”.

Minns talked about 3500 police, fines of more than $5500 for disobeying directions and needing to prevent “the clash of mourners and protesters”. The latter seemed to be an idea of Minns’ own making because there was never any plan for protesters to be near mourners.

Suppressing protests to keep us safe
Justice Wright agreed that it would be improper for the purpose of the regulation to be the suppression of protests. But he found that protests could be suppressed if it was consistent with the goal of facilitating “safety and crowd control” and that there was no intention on the part of the Minister or any other relevant person to “adversely affect any protest or right to protest except to the extent reasonably appropriate to facilitate the conduct of the visit”.

He agreed that there was no evidence that the protest would interfere with the President, but found that it did not matter.

When PAG’s barrister Felicity Graham argued that the powers in the Regulation could lead to unjust treatment of citizens, even those who were not protesters, the judge appeared mildly exasperated.

He assumed that officers act “reasonably”.

That turned out to be wildly optimistic. If the purpose was to keep us all safe, it had the opposite effect.

PAG is considering an appeal. The event is over, but there are many potential cases against the police, and the Act restricts liability and compensation. It might also be possible to raise implications of the Major Events Act on “freedom of expression”, which was not attempted in the short one-day hearing.

A protest was held near Parliament on Friday evening with a speech delivered from her hospital bed by a woman who suffered broken vertebrae: “We will not be silent. He [MInns] needs to take full responsibility for this and the laws that were passed. The police who did it need to take responsibility.”

If the Major Events Act can validly be used in protests, it needs reform. Imagine if the UN decided to hold a major climate conference backed by fossil fuel interests in Sydney? The whole city could be shut down to protesters.

Accountability for this disaster must start at the very top and run through to the police on the ground.

Wendy Bacon is an Australian investigative journalist who was professor of journalism at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). She worked for Fairfax, Channel Nine and SBS and has published in The Guardian, New Matilda, City Hub and Overland. She has a long history in promoting independent and alternative journalism. She is a long-term supporter of a peaceful BDS movement and the Greens. This article was first published by Michael West Media and is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

COMMENTARY: By Stuart Rees

The violence surrounding protests against the visit of Israel’s president was not an accident of crowd control. It reflects a deeper political failure – where authority suppresses dissent rather than confronting uncomfortable truths about Gaza, protest rights and democratic responsibility.

In official explanations of violence outside Sydney Town Hall on Monday evening, February  9, it sounds as though police were only trying to maintain public safety through various professional measures taken against the thousands outraged that President Isaac Herzog of Israel, charged with incitement to commit genocide, should be in the country.

Those explanations are false. Behind the extensive police powers to control and suppress protest lies a cancerous-like cowardice, facilitated by a cornered Prime Minister and by an Israeli sympathising, authoritarian NSW Premier.

Cowardice can be nurtured by pleasure in dominating, by fear of losing control, by being frightened to face truths, by deceits in pretending that all is well when it manifestly is not.

Restricting protests in order to stifle concern about slaughter in Gaza and the West Bank, or the PM asking the Australian public to “turn the temperature down” so that justifiable outrage about the Bondi massacres will deflect attention from an ongoing genocide in Palestine, is a cowardly technique.

And the PM is not the worst offender, even though government cowardice began when wedged by the Zionist Federation into supporting their invitation to the Israeli President.

Who runs the show you might ask?

Manhandling people
Suppression-oriented Premier Chris Minns delegates responsibility for his anti-protest laws to the chief of NSW police who is happy to oblige. In and out of uniform, cowards appear as strong men, usually men, who like to manhandle or beat up people.

There is no manliness in the police thuggery witnessed in Sydney streets on Monday.

Facile Premier Minns – or is he just naive – with no recognition of his own hypocrisy, says on Tuesday’s news “NSW police are not punching bags”. His holier than thou stance is shown alongside a man held down by police who are punching him repeatedly in the kidneys.

We then switch to the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, in Federal Parliament describing police action in general, “what the police were trying to do was sensible”.

As if thuggery on one man is insufficient, other police punch Greens MP Abigail Boyd in the head and shoulder, knock her over and are completely indifferent to her explanations of who she was and the civil and legal reasons for her presence at a legitimate, peaceful protest.

Cameras switch to police apparently unaware that their presence increases conflict, comprehending little, annoyed, then angry at the sight Moslem citizens in prayer on public pavements.

Then we witness no rationality, no civility, only the raw emotions of cowards not getting their way. The men kneeling in prayer are seen being picked up, removed and thrown aside. We’ll never know if deep-seated prejudice affected police conduct, but the question should be raised.

Opposition unity
On Tuesday, the mood of thuggery on the streets moved to the House of Representatives when a Greens MP Elizabeth Watson-Brown inquired of the Prime Minister whether the invitation to the President of Israel had undermined the unity of the country, whether the PM would condemn police violence and send Herzog home.

In response, before the Prime Minister could answer, the opposition benches found a unity which had eluded them for months.

United in their apparent support for Israeli slaughter in Gaza, wanting to be seen to be brave in their dislike of protest about Herzog, and apparently unable or unwilling to know much about genocide continuing during a ceasefire, one of the esteemed members of the newly reformed Coalition, was heard to advise colleagues as to how to deal with the Greens MP.

“Rip her apart,” he was reported as saying. It sounds as though this was exactly what he said. Asked by the Speaker to withdraw his comment, the offending MP did so.

But further support for cowardice camouflaged by thuggery was not far away. Keen to revive his image as macho man at large, former Prime Minister Tony Abbot recommended that police accused of punching protesters should receive a commendation and in future be armed with tear gas and be able fire rubber bullets.

Abbot would never regard himself as a coward but when denial of the existence of a genocide, a failure to face truths, is being multiplied by cowardice evident in acceptance of authoritarianism as the way to conduct politics, policing and even techniques for debate, there should be cross party and widespread public concern.

To meet the Prime Minister’s requests to lower the temperature, the country needs to replace the cowardice with sufficient courage to admit the truths about a genocide, the truths about the values of freedom of speech and the right to protest.

Cowardice may be disguised by violence but is demeaning.

Courage is a way to speak truths. Courageous action can be mentally and physically life enhancing, encourages justice, depicts what Bertolt Brecht called “the bread of the people” and in current Australian culture could infect almost everyone and lower the temperature. Try it.

Dr Stuart Rees AM is professor emeritus at the University of Sydney and recipient of the Jerusalem (Al Quds) Peace Prize. This article was first published in Pearls and Irritations: John Menadue’s Public Policy Journal and is republished with permission.

This article was first published on Café Pacific.

The violence surrounding protests against the visit of Israel’s president was not an accident of crowd control. It reflects a deeper political failure – where authority suppresses dissent rather than confronting uncomfortable truths about Gaza, protest rights and democratic responsibility.

In official explanations of violence outside Sydney Town Hall on Monday evening, February  9, it sounds as though police were only trying to maintain public safety through various professional measures taken against the thousands outraged that President Isaac Herzog of Israel, charged with incitement to commit genocide, should be in the country.

Those explanations are false. Behind the extensive police powers to control and suppress protest lies a cancerous-like cowardice, facilitated by a cornered Prime Minister and by an Israeli sympathising, authoritarian NSW Premier.

Cowardice can be nurtured by pleasure in dominating, by fear of losing control, by being frightened to face truths, by deceits in pretending that all is well when it manifestly is not.

Restricting protests in order to stifle concern about slaughter in Gaza and the West Bank, or the PM asking the Australian public to “turn the temperature down” so that justifiable outrage about the Bondi massacres will deflect attention from an ongoing genocide in Palestine, is a cowardly technique.

And the PM is not the worst offender, even though government cowardice began when wedged by the Zionist Federation into supporting their invitation to the Israeli President.

Who runs the show you might ask?

Suppression-oriented Premier Chris Minns delegates responsibility for his anti-protest laws to the chief of NSW police who is happy to oblige. In and out of uniform, cowards appear as strong men, usually men, who like to manhandle or beat up people.

There is no manliness in the police thuggery witnessed in Sydney streets on Monday.

Facile Premier Minns – or is he just naive – with no recognition of his own hypocrisy, says on Tuesday’s news “NSW police are not punching bags”. His holier than thou stance is shown alongside a man held down by police who are punching him repeatedly in the kidneys.

We then switch to the Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, in Federal Parliament describing police action in general, “what the police were trying to do was sensible”.

As if thuggery on one man is insufficient, other police punch Greens MP Abigail Boyd in the head and shoulder, knock her over and are completely indifferent to her explanations of who she was and the civil and legal reasons for her presence at a legitimate, peaceful protest.

Cameras switch to police apparently unaware that their presence increases conflict, comprehending little, annoyed, then angry at the sight Moslem citizens in prayer on public pavements.

Then we witness no rationality, no civility, only the raw emotions of cowards not getting their way. The men kneeling in prayer are seen being picked up, removed and thrown aside. We’ll never know if deep-seated prejudice affected police conduct, but the question should be raised.

On Tuesday, the mood of thuggery on the streets moved to the House of Representatives when a Greens MP Elizabeth Watson-Brown inquired of the Prime Minister whether the invitation to the President of Israel had undermined the unity of the country, whether the PM would condemn police violence and send Herzog home.

In response, before the Prime Minister could answer, the opposition benches found a unity which had eluded them for months.

United in their apparent support for Israeli slaughter in Gaza, wanting to be seen to be brave in their dislike of protest about Herzog, and apparently unable or unwilling to know much about genocide continuing during a ceasefire, one of the esteemed members of the newly reformed Coalition, was heard to advise colleagues as to how to deal with the Greens MP.

“Rip her apart,” he was reported as saying. It sounds as though this was exactly what he said. Asked by the Speaker to withdraw his comment, the offending MP did so.

But further support for cowardice camouflaged by thuggery was not far away. Keen to revive his image as macho man at large, former Prime Minister Tony Abbot recommended that police accused of punching protesters should receive a commendation and in future be armed with tear gas and be able fire rubber bullets.

Abbot would never regard himself as a coward but when denial of the existence of a genocide, a failure to face truths, is being multiplied by cowardice evident in acceptance of authoritarianism as the way to conduct politics, policing and even techniques for debate, there should be cross party and widespread public concern.

To meet the Prime Minister’s requests to lower the temperature, the country needs to replace the cowardice with sufficient courage to admit the truths about a genocide, the truths about the values of freedom of speech and the right to protest.

Cowardice may be disguised by violence but is demeaning.

Courage is a way to speak truths. Courageous action can be mentally and physically life enhancing, encourages justice, depicts what Bertolt Brecht called “the bread of the people” and in current Australian culture could infect almost everyone and lower the temperature. Try it.

Dr Stuart Rees AM is professor emeritus at the University of Sydney and recipient of the Jerusalem (Al Quds) Peace Prize. This article was first published in Pearls and Irritations: John Menadue’s Public Policy Journal and is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Amnesty International Australia has condemned the “unnecessary and disproportionate” and “shocking” use of force by the NSW police against peaceful protesters demonstrating against the visit of Israeli President Isaac Herzog to Australia.

In a statement, it said the human rights organisation strongly opposed the unnecessary and excessive force used by police, and called for an urgent, independent investigation of police conduct.

“The rights to freedom of expression and assembly are protected under international law,” the statement said.

“As a state party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Australia has a clear obligation to respect and uphold these fundamental human rights — this includes facilitating people exercising their right to peaceful protest.”

At least 10,000 people gathered in the Sydney Town Hall Square — although other sources said thousands more were prevented from joining the main demonstration — to protest against Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s four-day visit and to demand justice and accountability for the political leader.

In an earlier statement, Amnesty International said the Israeli President who Amnesty, the International Court of Justice and the UN Independent Commission of Enquiry had determined had overseen and directly incited genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, resulting in more than 70,000 deaths, should be investigated.

At Monday night’s protest in Sydney, at least 27 people were arrested, and many suffered from and were subjected to extreme and unnecessary police violence.

Police targeting
Amnesty International Australia said it was “deeply alarmed” by reports of police targeting already vulnerable and marginalised communities.

“First Nations Peoples, Muslim worshippers and leaders, as well as elderly protesters, were among those subjected to police use of force, including the use of pepper spray, police on horseback charging into crowds, and officers boxing protesters in with no avenue to safely disperse before launching attacks.

“The right to protest is protected under international law. What we witnessed last night was a serious assault on those rights and a deeply troubling display of State-sanctioned violence.”

— Amnesty International Australia’s Occupied Palestinian Territory Spokesperson,
Mohamed Duar

“Scenes of police officers using excessive force on Muslim worshippers who were peacefully praying are shocking,” it said.

Amnesty called for accountability and for the protection of freedom of religion. Protesters who had their hands raised and were clearly surrendering were subjected to punches and disproportionate force.

Amnesty activists and supporters, including teenagers, sustained injuries after being surrounded by police at Sydney Town Hall and prevented from leaving, before being charged from all sides.

The excessive use of force by police occurred against the backdrop of recent rushed protest laws passed by the NSW Parliament.

Amnesty warned that these laws risk criminalising peaceful protest and enabling arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement, particularly against vulnerable and marginalised communities.

“The events of last night demonstrate that our fears were well-founded,” the statement said.

‘State-sanctioned violence’
Amnesty International Australia’s Occupied Palestinian Territory Spokesperson Mohamed Duar said: “The right to protest is protected under international law. What we witnessed last night was a serious assault on those rights and a deeply troubling display of state-sanctioned violence.

“Police brutality and the use of excessive force by police have no place in Australia.

“Law enforcement officials should be protecting people’s right to protest, not violently suppressing peaceful protest and harming those demonstrating.

“As Australia rolled out the red carpet for Isaac Herzog, tens of thousands of people took to the streets to demand accountability for the genocide he has incited and overseen against Palestinians over the past two years.

“The NSW government is more concerned with punishing those protesting genocide, occupation and apartheid than those responsible for these war crimes.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

NSW Premier Chris Minns is sounding even more defensive after videos of NSW police violence towards peaceful protesters in Australia went viral — including attacks on Muslims praying in Sydney’s Town Hall Square after the rally on Monday.

His “primary concern”, he told ABC TV, was to prevent the gathered protesters opposing war criminal Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s visit from finding out that Herzog was in the city — around the corner, at the International Convention Centre at Darling Harbour.

“We can reveal this morning that we had 700 Jewish mourners in the city at the same time, and at the same location, and police had to keep them separate from protesters; if those police lines were breached, it would have been far, far worse,” Minns said.

The fact that Herzog was nearby was hardly a secret. Everyone knew, given the number of barricades and no-go zones that had been established over the previous few days.

We also knew Herzog was in Bondi and no public protest had been planned for that.

Minns’ comments were dishonest and cruel justifications for police violence.

Town Hall Square, the assembly point, was already starting to fill by 4.30pm, an hour before the protest was due to start. By 5.30pm, it was jam packed, including with many Jewish Australians and Arab Australians.

First Nations speakers
The programme included First Nations speakers, former Australian of the Year Grace Tame, NSW Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi and Labor MP Sarah Kaine (who was heckled because of federal and state Labor governments’ support for genocidal Israel).

The speeches focused on Herzog, why we oppose closer relations with Israel and Minns’ draconian new anti-protest laws, which give police new powers.

The atmosphere at the beginning was peaceful — except for the 3000 police that surrounded Town Hall Square, including snipers, and stretched across CBD blocks.

The police “kettled” the rally — a tactic designed to intimidate and make it easier to unleash force. Without warning, they started to tear-gas people who were kettled — and therefore with no escape route.

Older and young people alike were crushed by the police kettling and pushing, leaving some in agony unable to breathe and others on the ground covered in blood.

Minns justified this approach, saying “most protesters had dispersed . . .  but a small number didn’t”.

That is not true.

Repeatedly tear-gassed
Hundreds, if not thousands, of people were trying to disperse when the tear-gas order was given. People were tear-gassed repeatedly, when they were already on the ground. I, along with hundreds of others, was gassed with no escape route to move away.

Minns has repeatedly implied that protesters wanted to wreak havoc with Jewish mourners — without a shred of evidence.

No speaker asked the large crowd to do this; at no stage was violence suggested.

Anti-Herzog protesters may not agree with those welcoming Herzog, but our protest was against war criminal Herzog, the genocidal state he represents and Minns’ anti-freedom of speech and assembly laws.

If Minns and PM Anthony Albanese truly had Jewish Australians in mind after the Bondi terrorist attack, they would know that Jews are not one homogenous whole in their political views on Israel.

Yet the governments decided to go with the Zionists’ demands to invite Herzog and align themselves to the genocidal state of Israel.

Among the 30,000 people who felt they had to come to this protest were anti-Zionist Jewish Australians, who say Minns and Albanese do not speak for them.

Set up to be ‘tinderbox’
Minns said the “circumstances were a tinderbox”. That’s only because he, calculatedly, set it up to be.

His actions provoked hate and division and further tore apart social cohesion. How else do you explain police attacking a group of Muslims praying? He would not stand for Jews or Christians being attacked in the same way.

Minns’ ridiculous appeal to look beyond the viral social media clips of police violence and “bind up the wounds” shows he has completely lost the plot.

Minns should resign. He is not fit for the job and needs to be held to account.

Pip Hinman is a long-time anti-war activist and member of the Socialist Alliance. This article was first published by Green-Left and is republished here with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Dear Premier Chris Minns

I was arrested outside the Sydney Town Hall on Monday evening charged with assaulting a police officer.

During my violent arrest I sustained several bloody injuries. I can barely walk today and my right kidney hurts very badly as a result of its being punched. Or perhaps I have a cracked rib?

The demonstration was pretty much over when the police, backed up by eight or so fellow officers on horseback, started to aggressively push the crowd south, into an already very crowded space. I have witnessed this tactic before — used by police to generate a violent retaliatory response.

Up until then the police had been calm and respectful of we demonstrators. Then, they changed and became violent, as the footage you would have access to makes clear.

Clearly, someone in the chain of command instructed the police to create chaos and violent confrontations in order to retrospectively justify the large police presence yesterday, to use as evidence in support of the banning of future demonstrations, and in the hope that the media will play along and hold we demonstrators responsible for inciting violence.

Was it you who issued the edict to foment violence or someone else in the chain of command?

After 5 hours in a police cell with no offer of water or medical attention for my various injuries I was released without charge — the “assault police officer” allegation having been dropped when it became apparent, from body cam footage, that I had not done so.

I am a 76 year old filmmaker and journalist and request a response to this letter and an indication of whom I should approach within your government to have my spectacles and torn short replaced and my medical expenses paid?

James Ricketson

James Ricketson is an Australian film director and journalist, known for many feature films such as Blackfellas (1994) and documentaries like Born in Soweto. He was one of the founding members of the Australian Directors Guild.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Philippines police unlawfully targeted protesters with unnecessary and excessive force during anti-corruption marches in September, according to harrowing new testimony gathered by the human rights watchdog Amnesty International ahead of fresh protests planned across the country this weekend.

Ten people interviewed by Amnesty International detailed physical abuse — including violations that may amount to torture and other ill-treatment — by state forces following demonstrations in the capital Manila on 21 September 2025.

The research comes as thousands prepare to return to the streets on November 30 in renewed protests against government corruption, said the Amnesty International report.

“The disturbing evidence we have gathered of unlawful force unleashed by the police against protesters and others on September 21 makes a mockery of the Philippine government’s repeated claim that it exercises ‘maximum tolerance’ during protests,” said Jerrie Abella, Amnesty International regional campaigner.

“Victims have described how police punched, kicked and hit people — including children — with batons as they were arrested, with appalling ill-treatment continuing in detention. The police must change course and respect people’s right to protest on November 30 and beyond.”

Police only stopped beatings “when they saw the media coming”.

The Philippines’ biggest demonstrations in years took place on September 21, as tens of thousands in Manila and elsewhere protested against corruption by government officials, high-level politicians and contractors in flood-control and infrastructure projects.

Isolated incidents
Isolated incidents of violence from some protesters, including setting vehicles on fire and throwing stones at the police, were reported in Manila.

Manila police said they arrested and detained 216 people who were allegedly involved in the violence, including 91 children. Many are facing criminal charges.

However, Amnesty’s research indicates that peaceful protesters and bystanders were also violently targeted by the police.

Rey*, 20, recounted how three men in plain clothes — who he believes were police as they later handed him to uniformed officers — grabbed and punched him in the face as he tried to run away while holding a sign calling on people to take to the streets.

The assault on Rey was captured in a video, by an unknown individual, which he found online and showed to Amnesty International.

“Police in uniform joined in to punch, kick and hit me with their batons. I briefly lost consciousness but woke up to pain as they dragged me by my hair,” Rey told Amnesty International.

He said police accused him of taking part in violence that killed two officers, despite the fact that no police were killed in the protests.

Beating stopped when media came
Rey said the beating only stopped when one officer warned the others that members of the media were approaching. He also described how he and his friend were taken by uniformed police into an ambulance, where they were beaten further.

Omar*, 25, said he was watching the protests with relatives in Mendiola Street, Manila, when he was arrested.

Police accused him of being among those who caused violence, including attacking the police.

While walking with the police who arrested him, Omar said they passed other officers who punched and hit him with batons.

He said he was then held in a tent with about 14 other people, one of whom “had blood dripping from a head wound” which he said was from being hit with a gun by a police officer.

Ahmed*, 17, was arrested alongside his relatives Yusuf*, 18, and Ali*, 19, who all live and do construction work near the protest site.

They said they went out to buy rice and were waiting for police to allow them to pass through a protest area on their way back to the construction site when they were arrested.

‘Hit with batons, kicked’
“The police took us to a tent where they hit us with their batons. They punched us in the face and kicked our torsos,” Ali told Amnesty International. He said they were accused of attacking the police and subsequently detained.

‘I saw people coming out of the tent bloodied and bruised’

Greg*, 18, and Ryan*, 22, were arrested in separate incidents in Mendiola and Ayala Bridge in Manila for their alleged involvement in attacks against the police. Like all those interviewed, they were brought by the police to a blue tent in Mendiola, where police beat them further.

Lawyer Maria Sol Taule, from a legal aid group representing those interviewed, said the “notorious blue tent” served as a temporary holding area for those arrested. While it showed no outward sign of police affiliation, it appeared to be supervised by the police, according to the group’s investigation.

“I was so scared. I saw people coming out of the tent bloodied and bruised. Inside, they made me spread my hands and repeatedly hit both sides with their batons,” said Greg, who showed Amnesty International welts on his back where he said he was struck.

Ryan said police hit him on his head and neck. “They saw me lift my head up and accused me of ‘verifying’ or looking at the faces of police to identify them,” he said. Others interviewed reported being similarly hit following the same accusation by police.

“I told myself, I was done for. I’d never make it out of this tent alive,” said Michael*, 23, who described being punched, kicked and hit with batons by police. He was arrested with his girlfriend Sam*, 21, and their friend Lena*, 22, before all three were detained at a police station. They said they went to the protest just to watch and take videos but were arrested for allegedly committing violence.

Sam and Lena were not hurt but could hear people being beaten nearby. “Even now, I can still hear the cries coming from the tent. I have problems sleeping, imagining how they beat up Michael,” Sam said.

Needed medical treatment
The beatings were so severe that some victims needed medical treatment, according to Taule. She said one individual sustained injuries including a dislocated jaw when he was hit by the police with a baton in the face. Others – including Michael, Sam and Lena – lost their jobs after failing to report to work as they were detained.

All those interviewed maintained they were not involved in the violence of which they were accused by the police.

On November 4, police said 97 individuals had been charged with conspiracy, sedition and other crimes over the protests.

*Names were changed in the Amnesty International report upon request for safety reasons

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Civil Organisations Solidarity for Papua Land has condemned Indonesia’s Papua expansion plan of forming three new provinces risks causing new social conflicts.

And the group has urged President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo to cancel the plan, according to a statement reports Jubi.

The group — comprising the Papua Legal Aid Institute (LBH Papua), JERAT Papua, KPKC GKI in Papua Land, YALI Papua, PAHAM Papua, Cenderawasih University’s Human Rights and Environment Democracy Student Unit, and AMAN Sorong — said the steps taken by the House of Representatives of making three draft bills to establish three New Autonomous Regions (DOB) in Papua had created division between the Papuan people.

As well as the existing two provinces (DOB), Papua and West Papua, the region would be carved up to create the three additional provinces of Central Papua, South Papua, and Central Highlands Papua.

The solidarity group noted that various movements with different opinions have expressed their respective aspirations through demonstrations, political lobbying, and even submitting a request for a review of Law No. 2/2021 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 21/2001 on Papua Special Autonomy (Otsus).

These seven civil organisations also noted that the controversy over Papua expansion had led to a number of human rights violations, including the breaking up of protests, as well as police brutality against protesters.

However, the central government continued to push for the Papua expansion, and the House had proposed three bills for the expansion.

Wave of demonstrations
The Civil Organisations Solidarity for Papua Land said it was worried the expansion plan would raise social conflicts between parties with different opinions.

They said such potential for social conflict had been seen through a wave of demonstrations that continue to be carried out by the Papuan people — both those who rejected and supported new autonomous regions.

The potential for conflict could also be seen from the polemic on which area would be the new capital province.

In addition, rumours about the potential for clashes between groups had also been widely circulated on various messaging services and social media.

“All the facts present have only shown that the establishment of new provinces in Papua has triggered the potential for social conflicts,” the solidarity group said.

“This seems to have been noticed by the Papua police as well, as they have urged their personnel to increase vigilance ahead of the House’s plenary session to issue the new Papua provinces laws,” said the group.

The group reminded the government that the New Papua Special Autonomy Law, which is used as the legal basis for the House to propose three Papua expansion bills, was still being reviewed in the Constitutional Court.

Public opinion ignored
Furthermore, the House’s proposal of the bills did not take into account public opinion as mandated by Government Regulation No. 78/2007 on Procedures for the Establishment, Abolition, and Merger of Regions.

“It is the most reasonable path if the Central Government [would] stop the deliberation of the Papua Expansion plan, which has become the source of disagreement among Papuan people.

“We urged the Indonesian President to immediately cancel the controversial plan to avoid escalation of social conflict,” said the Civil Organisations Solidarity for Papua Land.

The solidarity group urged the House’s Speaker to nullify the Special Committee for Formulation of Papua New Autonomous Region Policy, as well as the National Police Chief and the Papuan Governor to immediately take the necessary steps to prevent social conflict in Papua, by implementing Law No. 7/2012 on Handling Social Conflicts.

The seven civil organisations also urged all Papuan leaders not to engage in activities that could trigger conflict between opposing groups over the Papua expansion.

“Papuan community leaders are prohibited from being actively involved in fuelling the polarisation of this issue,” the group said.

Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua Legal Aid Foundation (LBH) director Emanuel Gobay says a participant of a demonstration in Jayapura opposing the creation of new autonomous regions (DOB) in Papua is in a critical condition after being shot by a rubber bullet allegedly fired by a police officer.

Earlier, police forcibly broke up a demonstration opposing new autonomous regions in Papua.

“Yes [the critical injury] was at an action in Waena,” said Gobay when contacted by CNN Indonesia.

Although Gobay said he did not know the exact chronology of events leading up to the shooting, he confirmed that the victim was taking part in an action in front of Mega Waena department store in Jayapura.

“So right when they arrived in front of Mega Waena [the protest] was forcibly broken up, it was at this time that police used rubber bullets and the like. When a rubber bullet was fired it hit one of the protesters,” he said.

According to Gobay, the victim was immediately taken to a Mimika boarding house for treatment by students. He did not have any further information on the victim’s condition.

Gobay added that aside from the person shot by a rubber bullet, another participant suffered injuries after being assaulted by police.

Kicked in the chest
He said the victim was kicked in the chest by a police officer.

“This person ended up unconscious, then they were picked up and taken to the boarding house. Earlier I managed to meet with them, they complained that their chest still hurt because of being kicked. There were several others who were injured,” said Gobay.

Demonstrations against the creation of new autonomous regions and Special Autonomy (Otsus) in several parts of Jayapura were forcibly broken up by police on Tuesday.

One incident, in which police forcibly broke up a peaceful action using a water cannon, was recorded on video and shared on Twitter by Papuan People’s Petition (PRP) spokesperson Jeffry Wenda.

At least seven people were arrested by police during the action, including Wenda, West Papua National Committee (KNPB) spokesperson Ones Suhuniap and Omizon Balingga.

Police have yet to provide detailed information on the person shot by the rubber bullet.

So far they have only announced that they sized a number of pieces of evidence in the form of sharp weapons and materials with the banned Morning Star independence flag motif on them, which were confiscated during a sweep of demonstrators in the Sentani area of Jayapura regency.

Translated by James Balowski for IndoLeft News. The original title of the article was Satu Peserta Demo Tolak DOB Papua Tertembak Peluru Karet.

10/5/22 Yahukimo, West Papua

“New provinces: reject, reject, reject!”

“Special Autonomy: reject, reject, reject!”

“Papua: freedom!”

Video footage only came through today due to poor internet connection. pic.twitter.com/ml6INfI96r

— Veronica Koman 許愛茜 (@VeronicaKoman) May 12, 2022

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

An appeal by the television channel for more information was posted on the network’s Facebook page, saying Magei, a sales executive, “was taken by police around midday today after he reportedly filmed them destroying buai markets at 5mile market on his phone”.

It added: “We need your assistance in tracking down the vehicle [number given on the posting] and Richard.”

The television station’s management later removed the Facebook posting apparently while negotiations for Magei’s release were under way. But the incident came as an independent development blog in Australia today accused the PNG police of “rogue brutality” over several incidents.

Police Minister Bryan Kramer posted on the EMTV News Facebook page this message: “I’ve raised [the Magei] issue with ACP [Assistant Commissioner of Police] for NCD [National Capital Distriict] for Wagambie Jnr and he responded [that he had] asked Met Sup to look into it.”

The Minister for Communications and Information Technology, Timothy Masiu, appealed for Magei’s release, calling for “common sense to prevail”, the PNG Bulletin reports.

“I wish for Mr Magei’s unconditional release if he is indeed being held by police,” Minister Masiu said in a statement.

A senior EMTV news executive later confirmed that Magei had been released without charge.

The chewing of betel nut, the seed of the Areca palm known as “buai” in PNG, is common across parts of Asia and the Pacific. It is a strong tradition in PNG but some authorities have been trying to suppress the custom.

Police brutality a concern for PNG
“The use of force by police and police brutality continue to be a concern to the people of Papua New Guinea,” wrote Terence Kaidadaya and Okole Midelit today in the blog of the Development Policy Centre at the Australian National University’s College of Asia and the Pacific.

“Police brutality is only perpetrated by a minority of ill-disciplined rogue police officers and does not reflect the mindset of the Royal PNG Constabulary (RPNGC) in its entirety, but it certainly gives the constabulary a bad reputation,” the blog posting said.

“It creates distrust of the police by citizens and reflects badly on the PNG government.”

Kaidadaya is a foreign affairs officer with the Papua New Guinea Foreign Affairs Department and Midelit is a teaching fellow with the political science department at the University of Papua New Guinea.

The blog cited two examples out of many over the past few years – one from last month and one from 2016 – to illustrate the fact that alleged police brutality often stemmed from political influence in policing:

• 

  “On 18 April 2021, a few police officers attached to the Fox Unit in Port Moresby allegedly forcefully entered [lawyer Laken] Aigilo’s residence at night and assaulted him, and later kidnapped and threatened to kill him before detaining him at the Boroko Police Station. As Mr Aigilo has indicated, this was done without any prior formal complaint lodged against him, and without an arrest or search warrant. He was released the next day after instructions were issued by PNG Police Commissioner David Manning.

• “A practising lawyer, Mr Aigilo alleges that the police attack raises the question of whether or not police acted impartially or in support of Enga Governor Sir Peter Ipatas against him. This is because Mr Aigilo’s alleged assault and detainment came a day after he formally lodged a complaint with the PNG Ombudsman Commission against Sir Peter over allegations relating to financial mismanagement of the Porgera mine landowners’ royalty payments totalling up to K1.6 billion over a 30-year period.”
• “In 2016, students at the University of Papua New Guinea led nationwide protests against Prime Minister Peter O’Neill. Their grievances were many but centred on accountability and the lack of execution of a long-standing corruption charge and arrest warrant against the prime minister.
• “To quell the protest, armoured police officers went to UPNG and opened fire on unarmed university protesters, [shooting four dead and wounding 13]. The action was viewed by the public as politically motivated in order to protect politicians.”

Appropriate discipline needed
Kaidadaya and Midelit wrote in their blog that “appropriate disciplinary action needs to be taken against officers who either violate their constitutional roles or take sides when it comes to political interests”.

“Most importantly, politicians need to stop interacting with the police, and stop using them for political reasons,” the authors said. “Perhaps then, trust in, and the credibility of, the RPNGC could be restored.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s NGO Coalition on Human Rights has called for stronger accountability and commitment to human rights at home in response to the country taking the world stage as the head of a UN body.

The UN Human Rights Council (UNHCR) elected Fiji’s ambassador Nazhat Shameem as its 2021 president on Friday.

“As the president of the UNHCR, Fiji now faces global scrutiny on our human rights obligations,” said the NGOCHR chair Nalini Singh in a statement.

“This is a welcome opportunity for Fiji to reflect on our progress and the existing human rights concerns that need to be addressed.”

It was encouraging to witness a small Pacific island nation like Fiji taking the lead at a global forum and representing key regional human rights issues, she said.

“It is also a critical time for the Pacific and Fiji, as we see the impacts of the coronavirus pandemic exacerbating human rights issues in the region.

Fiji ‘must act over justice’
“With Fiji’s new appointment, our government must act to ensure that human rights and the principles of equality and justice are upheld across all sectors,” said Singh.

A recent concern has been cases of alleged police brutality that have been raised by the NGOCHR.

The NGOCHR has reaffirmed that there must be “no rollback of human rights” under the guise of response measures and continues to raise concerns on the arrests of Fiji citizens during the nation-wide curfew.

“We are at the world stage taking a strong stance on human rights but we must walk the talk here at home and set the example,” said Singh.

Fiji’s selection as the President of the UNHCR is a step forward in the right direction and we must keep this momentum to foster a culture that promotes and protects human rights, justice and democracy.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The United Liberation Movement if West Papua (ULMWP) has accused the Indonesian government of imposing martial law on the Melanesian region of West Papua and brutally supressing protests in a crackdown.

“Students have been shot with live rounds, tear gassed and beaten with bamboo sticks by police in Jayapura – just for staging a peaceful sit-in. How can people be shot and beaten for sitting in a public space?” said ULMWP chair Benny Wenda.

RNZ Pacific reports that the university students were forced to flee from the gunshots as the police dispersed the protesters yesterday.

The students were demonstrating against the government’s plans for a new Special Autonomy law in Papua region when members of both police and military forces came to disperse them.

Footage from Jayapura shows armed security forces personnel pursuing students through their dormitory precinct in Waena sub-district, accompanied by the sound of gunfire.

At least one student was wounded and has reportedly been taken to hospital.

A police spokesman has denied that the students were isolated in their dormitories, saying the demonstrators were disrupting public order.

Public gatherings not allowed
He said that during the covid-19 pandemic mass public gatherings were not allowed.

According to the Papua Legal Aid Institute, 13 people involved in the demonstration were arrested.

Over the past two months, two religious workers, pastor Yeremia Zanambani and Catholic preacher Rafinus Tigau, have been killed by the Indonesian military, says the ULMWP.

Another has been shot, and one more has mysteriously died.

Armed police were “stalking every corner of West Papua”, and troops awere forcing thousands of people from their homes across huge swathes of our land, the ULMWP’s website said today.

Forty-five thousand people have been displaced from Nduga Regency alone, and more are fleeing Intan Jaya every day.

“This is martial law in all but name,” said Wenda.

Urban military checkoints
“You cannot walk through an urban centre in West Papua today without being stopped by police, without meeting a military checkpoint.

“Every demonstration, no matter how peaceful, is met with mass arrests and police brutality – in Nabire on September 24, in Cenderawasih University on September 28, in Jayapura today.”

Wenda said Indonesia was “panicking” because Tuvalu Prome Minister Kausea Natano, chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, had raised concerns over West Papua this month.

Indonesia was “haunted” by the words of Vanuatu, issued at the UN General Assembly in September.

“Indonesia is terrified of our Black resistance, our fight against racism and our struggle for self-determination.

“A normal democratic country does not deploy thousands of military troops against peaceful resistance – martial law dictatorship does that.”

“My people are screaming for the world’s help. There is a double pandemic in West Papua: a pandemic of covid-19 and a pandemic of racism.”

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

September 16 – yesterday – marked the 45th year of Independence for Papua New Guinea. It also marked just over a year and three months since I was appointed Minister for Police, following the collapse of the O’Neill government.

I note many people are asking why I am so quiet in my role as Minister for Police, after years of being vocal in the fight against corruption.

The short answer is: I’ve been busy. Busy working around the clock to reform and improve the Police Force.

As a Member of Opposition, you don’t really have the mandate to reform the systems of government. You are literally on the outside, looking in.

Your mandate is to expose and oppose the government of the day in an effort to keep it accountable by keeping the public informed.

When you become a member of the government, you don’t have the luxury of time to write in-depth articles that expose corruption. Instead, you are busy trying to actually fix the problems you have been complaining about while in opposition.

After one year in office, what has become disturbingly evident is the extent of the problems.

Corruption deep rooted
Now, having spent time on the inside, I can see the extent of corruption in PNG. It is so deep rooted and so entrenched in every aspect of politics and business that it is almost beyond comprehension, and appears never-ending.

Under eight years of the O’Neill government the country was, and is, on the verge of collapse. Given the extent of the damage, it will take five years just to stop it from sinking further. It will take a generation to turn it around.

What is the way forward?

There are many who believe the solution is simply to arrest corrupt politicians and high ranking government officials.

But who is going to do all the investigations and make the arrests?

I would be happy to. Unfortunately our laws don’t give the Minister of Police power to make sweeping arrests. And I don’t expect Parliament to be in a rush to change the law to give me those powers any time soon.

So for now, the power to arrest and lay charges remains with our Police Force.

But many of our best and most experienced police officers have either retired, been dismissed for trying to do the right thing, or have left to pursue a career in the private sector.

Servant to corrupt politicians
Sadly, after eight years of the O’Neill government’s reign, the Police Force, once described as the pride of the country, was reduced to a private security business, servant to corrupt politicians and dodgy foreign businessmen.

Following my appointment as Minister of Police, I found our Police Force in complete disarray and riddled with corruption. The very organisation that was tasked with fighting corruption had become the leading agency in acts of corruption. Add to that a rampant culture of police ill-discipline and brutality.

How bad was it?

Senior officers based in Police Headquarters in Port Moresby were stealing from their own retired officers’ pension funds. They were implicated in organised crime, drug syndicates, smuggling firearms, stealing fuel, insurance scams, and even misusing police allowances.

They misused tens of millions of kina allocated for police housing, resources, and welfare. We also uncovered many cases of senior officers facilitating the theft of police land.

After one year, what have we achieved?

Under the Marape-Steven government, we have taken the first steps to implement sweeping reform.

Reforming from top down
Today, the Police Force and law and order has become the centrepoint of national discussion. And that’s exactly where it needs to be.

The Police Force is now getting the attention it so desperately needs.

We are reforming from the top down, following changes in Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner for Police. We are now at Assistant Commissioner and Director level, and expect to get down to Provincial Police Commander and Constable level by this time next year.

The best means to fight corruption and bring meaningful change is to restore our Police Force to the pride of the country. The Marape-Steven government has started that process. The past year was spent laying the foundations. In 2021 we will build on those foundations.

So back to the question: why am I so quiet?

Perhaps the reform of the Police Force is simply the calm before the storm.

Bryan Kramer is Papua New Guinea’s Police Minister. He is also one of the most transparent ministers on social media. In his rare spare time, he writes columns on issues for his Kramer Report web and Facebook pages. The Pacific Media Centre republishes his columns with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Simone da Silva Ribeiro Gomes and Lara Sartorio Gonçalves
From Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

It is a recurring debate. In 2011 journalist and activist Darcus Howe commented on the civil unrest that had happened in England in August of that year saying, “I don’t call it rioting. I call it an insurrection of the masses of the people. It is happening in Syria. It is happening in Clapham. It’s happening in Liverpool. It’s happening in Port of Spain, Trinidad, and that is the nature of the historical moment.” It is now June 2020 and that quote does not seem figurative as we observe a growing wave of protests, riots, and violence met with harsh repression and the criminalization of activism. But we must also remember that this is often how important rights and changes are won.

Behind every protest and riot there is invariably a Black man or a Latin American Indigenous person lying on the street of any given city in the Americas: in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and New York, US in 2014; in Minnesota, US in 2015; in Santiago, Chile in 2017; in Tierralta, Colombia in 2019; in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 2020,^[1] among thousands of others. The “No Justice, No Peace!” actions that have followed call attention to the killing of unarmed Black people in broad daylight by state agents (Abt, 2020). Then things invariably get complicated, with protests depicted as starting “largely peaceful, before taking a violent turn.” Outside of social movements and hegemonic narratives, what is violence, after all? Is it flaming objects?

Fire is commonly associated with riots, both in witness statements and in images of the events. The phrase “London is burning!” did not start with the 2011 riots, but with the anti-Catholic Gordon Riots of 1780 (Navickas, 2011). Social movements have historically experimented with violence, as illustrated by the suffragettes in 1918. While they are traditionally depicted as empowered young women holding placards, determined to win the right to vote and have a voice on equal terms with men, they also participated in numerous acts of violence, including explosions and bombs throughout the United Kingdom for several years prior to winning voting rights.^[2]

We would like to draw attention to the magnetic attraction to fire in protests. It is no wonder, humans have been using fire for over 400.000 years. The human ability to control fire is linked to our ability to evolve as a species, as we have learned to use it to cook, forge tools, and stay warm. Among the many things that fire may depict are passion, desire, rebirth, resurrection, eternity, destruction, hope, and purification. People have written extensively about fire and its ability to nourish and protect, but also cause harm and kill. Along with water, air, and earth, it is considered one of the four elements essential to life.

The images of burning buildings, stores, and public sculptures seem to fascinate humanity. But they are often misunderstood, even among activists and social movement scholars. Direct actions^[3] are often controversial. Public opinion has moral objections to civil disobedience, believing that violence is the sole prerogative of the State. Even the political Left sometimes creates a tight separation between spontaneous and organized actions. In this light, (literally) inflamed actions can be interpreted as a simulation of non-existent radicalism, if it is not accompanied by political strategy.

Therefore, what we propose is that burning should not be seen as an end in itself, but as a ritual with potential for communication and mobilization. Direct action has been recurrent in racial and food riots throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, most often used by those most directly targeted by the state and who, therefore, have less bureaucratic methods of response, since they are disconnected from the social compact. Fire, as a flaming symbol of a decaying world, is here understood to be a performative tactic that produces meaning and inflammatory reactions.

The current protests were sparked by the May 25, 2020 killing of George Floyd. An African American male, 46 years old, recently unemployed, father of a six-year-old girl,^[4]  was savagely killed by a white male  police officer named Derek Chauvin. This tragic event resulted in people going out into the streets in the midst of  the COVID-19  health crisis. It all started in Minneapolis, but by the following Sunday, protests had broken out in 75 cities across the US, and many more in Brazil, shedding light on the persistent racism in our societies, with at least four deaths and around 1,700 arrests.^[5]  A protest speech by #BlackLivesMatter activist Tamika Mallory went viral: : “We cannot look at this as an isolated incident. The reason why buildings are burning are not just for our brother George Floyd. They are burning down because people here in Minnesota are saying to people in New York, in California, people in Memphis, to people all across this nation: enough is enough.”^[6]

By late May 2020 the protests had taken on a certain aesthetic which has historical precedent. By now many of us have seen, read about, and probably shared pictures of the Midwestern city of Minneapolis and its flaming buildings. Those images are indeed very powerful and are assumed to be effective. If buildings are burning, then people are fed up and the protests must be working, demands will be met and minorities’ voices will be heard–or so other social movements will say.

But this is not always how protests operate. Literature on protests considers them to be key components of democracy, an expression of ideals and principles that necessarily challenge dominant orthodoxies. In the past, the civil rights movement applied many different tactics, from bus boycotts to sit-ins to freedom-rides to community-wide protest campaigns (Tufecki, 2017). In the last few years, actions have been more performative, in both strategy and tactics (Butler, 2015). Visual activism has ranged from protest graffiti (Thomas 2018) to fine art photography in which the protester has some control over the framing (Hallas 2012). This form of struggle is broadly related to forms in political protests that emerged following the economic and financial crisis of 2008.

Also, they happen when people come together to react against inequality, injustice, exclusion, and other vulnerabilities. The aesthetics of protest primarily include humour, graffiti, slogans, art, symbols, slang, gestures, bodies, colors and other elements of performance that can be digitally shared across media platforms. All protest aesthetics are both performative and communicative (McGarry, Erhart, Eslen-Ziya, 2019).

Visuals matter. But so does what happens following the protests. These fire-related protests are frequently followed by looting, and looting sometimes causes a setback for the movement. George Rudé, Edward Thompson, and Eric Hobsbawm have documented riots from the 18th to 20th century in Europe, and found that looting, plunder, and fire were rather common. In Brazil, although historically disputed among the Left (Gorender, 1987), since the 1930s, and particularly in the state of Sao Paulo in the 1980s, direct actions appeared spontaneously as a form of struggle with heavy repercussions. Looting can illuminate a specific historical moment by exposing the contradictions, conflicts, and tensions in the political, economic, and social spheres.

Accordingly, literature about riots (Briggs, 2012, Ferreira, 2009, Kelley and Tuck, 2015, Bowden, 2014, Abt, 2019, Abu-Lughod, 2006) indicates that when objects and buildings are burned in protests, this invariably provokes curfews, a police backlash, (un)justified repression, and even the rise of the far Right. We will not focus on these repercussions, but on the link between burning objects and people not being able to breathe. We are experiencing the systematic suffocation of Black people, which did not start with Eric Garner´s murder in 2014, when his dying words were, “I can’t breathe.” This is part of the long history of populations being enslaved based on the color of their skin. The subjugation of the original peoples of the Americas and the Atlantic slave trade are a large part of this vivid memory, forcefully kept alive through police brutality.

The idea that everything must burn down in order to start a new world is not new, but the mere act of burning is emblematic of contemporary struggles. A sort of pyromania is an integral part of these contemporary riots–including the response that these images invoke among both social movement protesters in the streets and scholars. Fire is fascinating to the broad political spectrum:  from right-wing groups ready to incriminate as soon as they see flames, to left-wing activists celebrating what they consider to be a victory.

George Floyd´s horrific death at the hand of a former US police officer not only shows the murder of a human being, but the domination of one enormous group of people by another. Black people account for 13% of the US population and 55.8%^[7] of the Brazilian population,^[8] but persistent racial inequalities have triggered anger and distrust of institutions in the Americas. It is not far from the truth that fire implies radicalism  to a certain degree, but protesters and scholars’ hypotheses must take into account the changing patterns of protest. The global Left seems to think that Revolution is coming when they see images of burning cars and buildings, knowing that history repeats itself and people have had enough.

In a brief semiotic exercise, the study of signs and symbols and their use or interpretation, we gather from the images below that victory, revenge, and fatigue have fueled the last few weeks of protest in the Americas. But since the extraction of meaning is not a straightforward process, it is evident that the burning of objects may be interpreted as success by the participants and scholars, while they are also quite likely to be both the cause and effect of repression of further protests.

Fire is a handy resource in protests because it does not allow the insistent actions and voices of rioters to leave the landscape unscathed, as Thompson once said about “hunger rioters.” Because fire is also a specific way to destroy what exists, “a complete destruction, because the trail that the fire leaves is itself, the fire that passed through here” (ILHARCO, 2008: 150). It also finds its way into mass media, since it becomes impossible for state agents not to respond, leading to increased repression. And there are variations on how much repression they will unleash: President Donald Trump enraged many with his tweet, “When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” giving an historic endorsement of police violence,^[9] and it is not far fetched to say, an endorsement of white supremacist shootings of rioters.^[10]

Breathing is not optional

Achille Mbembe (2020) calls our attention to the day after COVID-19 and how it ought not come at the expense of the same people the economy was sacrificing prior to these protests. The day after will come but only if there is a reinvention, since it has become evident that we are surrounded by rings of fire. The philosopher states that before this virus, humanity was already threatened with suffocation and unable to choose the terms of death, given that entire segments of the world population, entire races, are condemned to a life of oppression. Mbembe calls for the universal right to breathe–not just biological breathing–but  breathing as full enjoyment of the human experience.

The mesmerizing, dystopian scenario that the pandemic unleashed paved the way for the moment we now face: the curious observation that the apocalypse is nothing more than our everyday existence. The survival mode the vast majority of the world’s population has been living in is like holding one’s breath, waiting for death, or rather, its relief. As Walter Benjamin said in 1940, “The tradition of the oppressed teaches us that the ‘state of emergency’ in which we live is not the exception but the rule. We must attain a conception of history that is in keeping with this insight. Then we shall clearly realize that it is our task to bring about a real state of emergency, (…).”^[11] It is no coincidence then that red images of insurrection make us feel heat. Fire. The moment when the burning present day makes us face our fears, and we panic at the prospect of losing what little we have, is also seductive. Just as heat is agitation, fire can function as an extension of creative acts: transformation.

To the end

Disruptive events can cut history time, as Hannah Arendt once said. A significant example is 9/11 in the US, for which there is a before and an after. The world afterwards is marked by asymmetry and significant changes in global war paradigms, as highlighted by Chamayou (2015). Counterinsurgency was the effort to control those who, through their demands, confronted States, fighting as sectors of the population with fundamental rights. An important change occurred after 9/11, when fighting terrorism replaced counterinsurgency, and the enemy came to be depicted as a dehumanized, generic “terrorist.”

Consider hellfire, which plays a role in constituted memory. To put it in divine terms, we find ourselves in a world divided between good and evil – a form of Manichaeism appropriate to a context of (permanent) war. We know it is irrational, but different notions of “otherness” have been developed to define the terrorist enemy. This is not just semantics, but a legal concept. Following the example of the United States, most countries have adopted anti-terrorism laws in the last few years. The dynamics of this, the way collectives, political organizations, social movements, and protesters have been framed, allows them to be the best next terrorists.

For example, this was the first reaction of Presidents Bolsonaro and Trump when referring to the recent #BlackLivesMatter protesters. Use of the fire aesthetic seductively plays into this discourse,  as we have become accustomed to political imagery that associates fire with terror. Explaining the problem of political violence as the reaction of the oppressed is, thanks to the politics of fear, fertile ground for authoritarianism, social control and increased surveillance of the population.

The two sides in the protests were never evenly matched. The weapons and subsequent violence one side can mobilize easily overwhelms the power of the multitudes. The growing state security apparatus to control and repress protests is worrisome, quite often enhanced by drones,^[12] which seem to “construct a bodiless force, a political body with no organs” (Chamayou, 2015). Drones have been increasingly used to monitor, repress and eliminate targets, while maintaining immunity since there is no logic of reciprocity in state violence.

Modern democracies, usually antagonistic to authoritarianism, are founded on inclusion of the masses in decision-making processes. This is supposed to coincide with the notion that fear of popular uprisings should guide the practice of political power. Indeed, the policy of fear, meaning fear of the most marginalized sectors of society, feeds into the aforementioned state of emergency. In the words of #BLM activist Tamika Mallory, “This is a coordinated activity happening across this nation. So we are in a state of emergency. We [as Black people] are dying in a state of emergency.”^[13] In these terms, the description of what is said to be an emergency–be it the burning of buildings and police vehicles or other forms of reaction–is instilling fear in the powers that be, which in turn is freeing for the protesters.

Simone da Silva Ribeiro Gomes is Associate Professor of Sociology at Universidade Federal de Pelotas (UFPel), and an activist on popular education.
Lara Sartorio Gonçalves is Phd Candidate in Sociology by Social and Political Studies Institute (IESP), of State University of Rio de Janeiro (UERJ).

Fred Mills and Jill Clark-Gollub assisted as editors of this article

[Main photo: protest in Rio de Janeiro, 2019. Credit: Thayla Fernandes da Conceição]

End notes

^[1] “Black lives shattered: outrage as boy, 14, is Brazil police’s latest victim,” https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/brazil-black-lives-police-teenager

^[2] “Suffragettes, violence and militancy,” https://www.bl.uk/votes-for-women/articles/suffragettes-violence-and-militancy

^[3] “As “direct action” we understand actions which reject mediation instruments, that are not filtered by the institutions. They are situated in the field of civil disobedience and direct confrontation with the repressive forces of the State, […] involves damaging the private property of multinationals and other companies, looting of stores, graffiti on walls, breaking of shop windows and occupations of public spaces “. (SARTORIO, 2014).

^[4] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/may/29/george-floyd-who-was-he-his-friends-words

^[5] Numbers of Saturday May 30th, available at: https://www.gadsdentimes.com/news/20200531/protest-roundup-lsquowersquore-sick-of-itrsquo-anger-over-police-killings-shatters-us

^[6] Available at https://www.facebook.com/164188247072662/posts/1871493659675437/?vh=e&d=n

^[7] Following the trends of academic research on the theme of inequality, here we use Black to mean the sum of those who call themselves blacks and browns (RIOS, PEREIRA, RANGEL, 2017). Available from: http://cienciaecultura.bvs.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0009-67252017000100015

^[8] Source: IBGE https://educa.ibge.gov.br/jovens/conheca-o-brasil/populacao/18319-cor-ou-raca.html

^[9] “Racist History Behind Trump’s Threat to Shoot Minneapolis Protesters Spurs Twitter to Act,” https://theintercept.com/2020/05/29/twitter-restricts-access-trumps-threat-shoot-minneapolis-protesters/

^[10] “Donald Trump threatens to send in troops amid Minneapolis riots sparked by death of George Floyd,” https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-29/donald-trump-tweet-minneapolis-violence-protest-police-precinct/12299136

^[11] Walter Benjamin, On the Concept of History, https://www.sfu.ca/~andrewf/CONCEPT2.html

^[12] “Customs and Border Protection Is Flying a Predator Drone Over Minneapolis,” https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/5dzbe3/customs-and-border-protection-predator-drone-minneapolis-george-floyd

^[13] Available from: https://www.facebook.com/164188247072662/posts/1871493659675437/?vh=e&d=n

References

ABU-LUGHOD, Janet L. Race, Space, and Riots in Chicago, New York and Los Angeles. Social Forces, 2006, vol. 88, no 3.

ABT, Thomas (2019). Bleeding Out – The Devastating Consequences of Urban Violence. Basic Books.

BUTLER, Judith (2015). Notes toward a performative theory of assembly. Harvard university Press, 2015.

CHAMAYOU, Grégoire (2015). A Theory of the Drone. The New Press.

GORENDER, Jacob. (1987). Combate nas trevas: a esquerda brasileira: das ilusões perdidas à luta armada. São Paulo: Editora Ática.

ILHARCO, Fernando (2008). A catarse do fogo: a simbologia do fogo nos ecrãs da televisão. Comunicação & Cultura, n.o 5, 2008, pp. 139-153

KELLEY, Tuck (2016). The Other Special Relationship – Race, Rights, and Riots in Britain and the United States. Springer.

MBEMBE, Achille. (2020). Le droit universel à la respiration. Mukanda, Buala. Available at: https://aoc.media/opinion/2020/04/05/le-droit-universel-a-la-respiration/

NAVICKAS, Katrina (2011). Fire and fear: rioting in Georgian London and contemporary Britain History Policy. Available at: http://www.historyandpolicy.org/opinion-articles/articles/fire-and-fear-rioting-in-georgian-london-and-contemporary-britain

MCGARRY, Aidan, ERHART, Itir, ESLEN-ZIYA, Hande, et al (2019). Introduction: The Aesthetics of Global Protest: Visual Culture and Communication. In : The Aesthetics of Global Protest: Visual Culture and Communication. Amsterdam University Press. p. 15-35.

THOMPSON, Edward. (2016). The making of the English working class. Open Road Media.

TUFECKI, Zeynep (2017). Twitter and Tear Gas. Yale University Press.

By Roger D. Harris
From Corte Madera, California

The police murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis on May 25^th was the spark that ignited the tinder of accrued injustice throughout the US and globally. This injustice has deep antecedents in the US and indeed in much of what is now called the Global South. There is a shared history of colonial conquest of the Indigenous and the abominable institution of the enslavement of African peoples.

What happened has its roots in systemic oppression that has resonated internationally. Just as the police suffocated George Floyd, US unilateral coercive measures against Venezuela, Cuba, Nicaragua, Iran, Zimbabwe, and nearly one third of humanity are designed to asphyxiate those nations which aspire to pursue an independent course.

International Movement Erupts

Defying coronavirus restrictions on public assembly, people are amassing in solidarity.

• In the US colony of Puerto Rico, hundreds danced bomba and chanted the names of their martyrs along with George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and so many others. A guillotine was hauled up to the governor’s mansion.
• In Mexico, where Bill Clinton’s NAFTA decimated peasant agriculture, among the signs affixed to the security fencing in front of the US embassy was one reading, “racism kills, here, there, and all over the world.”
• Thousands took the streets in major cities in Brazil under the banner Vidas Negras Importam! The anti-racist struggle was connected to criticisms of the rightwing Bolsonaro government’s handling of the pandemic.
• In Chile, where the indigenous Mapuche leader Alejandro Treuquil was just assassinated, the cry “Mapuche lives matter” can be heard.
• In Greece, where the EU had wrecked the economy, youth associated with the Communist Party (KKE) lined up in front of the US embassy in Athens and the US consulate in Thessaloniki bearing torches and holding signs reading “capitalism means I can’t breathe.”
• In England, authorities had long resisted removal of the statue of 17^th-century slave trader Edward Colston, but 10,000 protesters marching in solidarity with the Black Lives Matter movement tore the racist symbol down and dumped it into the River Avon. Statues of colonialists Winston Churchill and Cecil Rhodes have been targeted by the movement and may come tumbling down too.In Belgium, statues of King Leopold II are meeting a similar fate as tens of thousands take to the streets in protest. The late 19^th and early 20^th-century monarch became fabulously wealthy over the dead bodies of millions of Africans, who were subjected to terrible atrocities.
• Warriors for Aboriginal Resistance and others drew the connection between the police murder of African Americans in the US to the deaths of over 400 Indigenous who are believed to have died in police custody in Australia as protests arose throughout the country.
• Similar actions took place in New Zealand, where the indigenous Maori are oppressed.
• In Cape Town, protesters marched on the parliament to pay homage to George Floyd and a local man, Collins Khosa, who was beaten to death by South African police, describing their struggle as part of an anti-neocolonial, anti-imperialist movement.
• In occupied Jerusalem, an autistic Palestinian man, Eyad Halak, was killed by Israeli police, precipitating demonstrations proclaiming: “Eyad and George [Floyd] were victims of similar systems of supremacy and oppression. They must be dismantled.”

This “historic alliance” of the Movement for Black Lives with the oppressed abroad goes back to their 2016 founding document, which then characterized Israel as an “apartheid” state, condemned US backing for the settler “genocide” against Palestinians, and supported the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions Movement against Israel.

Linking Home and Abroad

The militarization of the US domestic police is bringing home the practices that the government perfected in suppressing popular expressions for self-determination abroad. The US’s closest international partner, Israel, is a master of abusive police practices against its own Palestinian population. Development of those practices, partly funded by the US, are then imported back to the US. Over 100 Minneapolis police received training from Israeli law enforcement officers along with other police departments across the country.

Newsweek describes “how America’s police became an army.” Under the 1033 Program, military equipment is transferred to the domestic police, who are then mandated to use the equipment as a condition of the program.

While the police have been shooting rubber bullets and teargas at demonstrators in the homeland, the US military deployed a so-called Security Force Assistance Brigade to Colombia. As the “world’s policeman,” the US has some 800 formal military bases internationally; no other country has more than a handful of foreign bases.

Budgets for both domestic police and the US military are obscenely inflated and continue to grow, receiving bipartisan support. The Black Lives Matter movement questions whether either of these armed forces – police and military – truly serve or protect us. When Hurricane Katrina flooded poor African American neighborhoods in New Orleans, people were left to die stranded on rooftops while the police and the National Guard guarded private property.

Amid the current pandemic, ordinary people are experiencing punishing austerity with the worst yet to come. While the US Fed is doling out hundreds of billions of dollars daily at a 1/10 of one percent interest rate – practically free money – to the banks, the average US citizen is saddled with average  credit card penalty interest rates of just under 30%. Who is doing the real looting?

Likewise, payments of unjust debt – mostly accrued by US-backed military dictatorships – to vulture capitalists from the US and other wealthy countries are stealing the livelihoods of the peoples of Argentina and other nations saddled with socially unsustainable debt burdens.

More people are behind bars in the US than anywhere else in the world, largely due to the so-called war on drugs, which in fact is a war on the most vulnerable and a pretext for the deployment of coercive means of social control. Black and brown people are targeted for arrest, adjudication, and imprisoned disproportionately compared to their numbers in the general population. The NAACP reports African Americans are imprisoned at five times the rate of whites. While poor communities in the US, particularly those of color, are suffering from the plague of drugs, the primary world source of cocaine is the US client state of Colombia and the primary world source of heroin  is US-occupied Afghanistan.

Delegitimization of “American Exceptionalism”

President Obama unequivocally exclaimed: “I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being.” In another speech, he proclaimed: “[W]hat makes us the envy of the world…[is] the fact that we’ve given everybody a chance to pursue their own true measure of happiness. That’s who we are.”

That’s not who “we” are, and the chant “no justice, no peace” is exposing that to the world. American exceptionalism is the ideological construct used to extol “American world leadership” based on the vision that the US is uniquely just and therefore has an obligation to endow the rest of the world with its freedom. As George Floyd’s niece Brooke Williams asked, “when has America ever been great?”

The US “leads” the world in incarceration of its own people, in consumption of addicting illicit drugs, in military and police spending, and in foreign military bases. No one elected the US to impose its “full spectrum dominance” on the globe. With the internationalization of the Black Lives Matter movement, this justifying ideology is being challenged, delegitimizing the US imperial project.

The internationalization of the protests reflects an understanding that it is the same US imperialist knee on the neck at home and abroad. Martin Luther King’s indictment that “the United States is the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today,” rang true in 1967 and ever more so now. Appropriately, the movement around Black Lives Matter, which has engaged the popular classes in what Che called the “belly of the beast,” has taken international prominence signifying that where there is oppression, there will be resistance.

As activist and lawyer Mark P. Fancher observes, “resistance is global.” International solidarity among the oppressed has a long tradition and is gathering momentum based on the understanding there is one struggle for justice with many fronts. “No justice, no peace” is being heard around the world.

Roger D. Harris is Associate Editor at COHA and also part of the Task Force on the Americas, a human rights group working in solidarity with the social justice movements in Latin America and the Caribbean since 1985.

[Main photo-credit: Patricio Zamorano/COHA.org]