A - I n f o s

a multi-lingual news service by, for, and about anarchists **
News in all languages
Last 40 posts (Homepage) Last two weeks' posts Our archives of old posts

The last 100 posts, according to language
Greek_ 中文 Chinese_ Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_ _The.Supplement

The First Few Lines of The Last 10 posts in:
Castellano_ Deutsch_ Nederlands_ English_ Français_ Italiano_ Polski_ Português_ Russkyi_ Suomi_ Svenska_ Türkçe_
First few lines of all posts of last 24 hours | of past 30 days | of 2002 | of 2003 | of 2004 | of 2005 | of 2006 | of 2007 | of 2008 | of 2009 | of 2010 | of 2011 | of 2012 | of 2013 | of 2014 | of 2015 | of 2016 | of 2017 | of 2018 | of 2019

Syndication Of A-Infos - including RDF - How to Syndicate A-Infos
Subscribe to the a-infos newsgroups

(en) Poland, The process of participants and participants of the Black Protest - the judicial battle [machine translation]

Date Sun, 14 Apr 2019 09:36:45 +0300


03.10. In 2016, we took part in a black protest in Poznan. Since then we have been regularly dragged by the courts. Some of us were unreasonably detained and arrested during the demonstration. Maciek, Jacek and Gosia were charged with violating the police's immunity and taking part in an illegal gathering. Asia, Iwka and Pawel were accused of participating in the illegal gathering with the knowledge that its participants intend to carry out a violent attack on police officers much later - after they reported that the police had exceeded their rights. To prosecute them was a simple revenge for making problems - a classic example of political repression. ---- The Amnesty International report wrote about the absurdity of the whole situation:

The case of the Black Protest in Poznan is an example of the police using disproportionate direct coercion measures during demonstrations. It is also worrying about not investigating complaints about police officers and limiting the possibility of exercising the right of an injured party to an effective remedy. It also seems that in the District Attorney's Office of the Old Town, the scope of concepts has been confused, which was justified by the use of force by referring, inter alia, to the "illegality" of the assembly. Peaceful gathering is freedom, the implementation of which does not depend on the consent of the authorities. International human rights law and standards do not allow countries to require prior approval for organizing a meeting.
In accordance with international human rights law and standards, failure to notify authorities or failure to comply with other administrative requirements does not allow the conclusion that the assembly is "illegal." The authorities may consider that an assembly is illegal, for example if its purpose is to prevent another assembly from being organized, and thus to prevent others from exercising freedom of assembly. But even then, law enforcement authorities are entitled to use only measures that are necessary and proportionate to achieve the objective they face. International standards are clear - especially regarding the use of force in such circumstances - and provide that when dispelling unlawful but peaceful assemblies, law enforcement officials should avoid the use of direct coercion measures, and if this is not possible, they should use force to the smallest extent necessary. In other words, the fact that an assembly in accordance with national law is illegal does not justify the use by law enforcement officials of the force to dissipate it. The position of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association is unequivocal on this point: prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies just because "their message does not please the authorities" is a violation of international human rights law. " that a given assembly under national law is illegal, does not justify the use by law enforcement officials of the force to dissipate it. The position of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association is unequivocal on this point: prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies just because "their message does not please the authorities" is a violation of international human rights law. " that a given assembly under national law is illegal, does not justify the use by law enforcement officials of the force to dissipate it. The position of the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of assembly and association is unequivocal on this point: prohibiting and disperasing peaceful assemblies just because "their message does not please the authorities" is a violation of international human rights law. "

We have been interrogated for two years, we have been taking part in court hearings almost every month. The process has already cost us a lot of money, nerves and time. Of course, in the meantime, the trial against the police was discontinued, despite many witnesses and victims, the prosecutor's office did not notice any shortcomings on their part. In the justification, we read that "It should be indicated and what can not be omitted, taking into account the facts of the present case, that the persons injured in the present proceedings include persons who operate in the Anarchist movement in Poznan (Anarchist Federation Poznan, Rozbrat) or are indicated movement in a different way connected. Members of this movement take part in various protests, trying through their provocative behaviors,

The website of the Anarchist Federation includes a number of demonstration tips including those referring to the need to put on face masks, bounce arrests and others. In the present case, it is possible to observe the typical actions of this kind, in particular provocative - as the use of masks, throwing stones and flares at officers, directing vulgar and offensive words to police officers. Most of these behaviors are dangerous to life and health.
[...]However, the testimony of the victims, in the context of the remaining evidence gathered in the case - was considered subjective because they are inconsistent with other evidence in the case, including collected documents and testimonies of other witnesses (we remind you that other witnesses are police officers! note by the authors of the report). In particular, it is also difficult to assume that the officers deliberately humiliated and used unnecessary violence against unknown and strangers, without having any personal interest in it, and also risking their own life and health and loss of employment.
[...]In the opinion of the supervising prosecutor, police officers took urgent decisions of vital importance for the protection of life and health in a dynamic and dangerous situation which is undoubtedly a confrontation with over a thousand people. As well, they acted with the risk of their own life and health in extremely stressful and directly threatening life, health and the situation. It should be emphasized that uncontrolled crowd reactions are extremely dangerous.
You can not forget about this when assessing the behavior of police officers, because it is easy to assess such situations in the privacy of your private office or private home. Therefore, the issue of a call to comply with the law in the context of fulfilling the conditions of art. Article 34 paragraph 2 of the Act on coercive measures and firearms does not matter. "
We have been treated in advance by the apparatus of power as criminals and liars, whose voice means nothing to the police who are fighting for life, who never abuse their powers and do not use unjustified aggression.

Returning to our process -

During the subsequent hearings we have not been provided with any credible evidence of our offenses. Most of the prosecutors' witnesses did not remember anything, and those who could describe the course of events more closely, made use of strange and crazy references to Youtube videos, denied each other or evidently confabulated, suggesting that we are members of some professional, organized and dangerous criminal group, which seems absurd. As a member of the criminal group, we are also treated by a judge who did not want to accept our list of witnesses until the last minute, and called for the help of security guards for tomorrow's hearing. In the minutes of the last hearing, she placed the recommendation: "Ask the Judicial Police with a letter informing them of the dates of the hearings, informing them,

It does not surprise us at all, we already knew about the approach of judges Agnieszka Cabrery-Kasprzak to activists and activists. Some time ago, out of curiosity, we checked whether in the past she had had contact with the anarchist community. It soon turned out that the judge had temporarily discarded a loud case about the use of a private paralyzer on duty by a police officer during a lecture on gender in Poznan. We dug up to the article in which excerpts of the justification for such a decision and its criticism are quoted.

In a nutshell, Judge Agnieszka Cabrera-Kasprzak stated that the crime took place, and by taking a private taser to the lecture, the policeman "acted in advance with intentional intention" and "knew that he was acting in violation of the law". However, she dismissed the matter because of ... negligible social harm. This is a guilty statement, but formally the policeman will remain unpunished and will not lose his job. However, the judge said that the policeman had the right to feel threatened because he was in civilian clothes, without a vest or helmet. He also expected the lecture to be interrupted by anarchists because the police warned the organizers about it. "He certainly knew the typical behaviors of this type of professional experience"[...]"He had to know from the office that
public officials'.

This is the unfounded, unjustified, very vague and stereotypical approach of the Judges to activists and activists who are shocking and worried. Today, interrogation of defense witnesses begins. We hope that judge Agnieszka Cabrera-Kasprzak will remain objective, forget about his prejudices and listen to what they have to say in our case.

http://www.rozbrat.org/informacje/poznan/4665-2019-04-09-13-29-18
_________________________________________
A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C E
By, For, and About Anarchists
Send news reports to A-infos-en mailing list
A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Subscribe/Unsubscribe http://ainfos.ca/mailman/listinfo/a-infos-en
Archive: http://ainfos.ca/en
A-Infos Information Center