|
|
| The Names | Growing Pains | Reader Comments |
| Links | Actions | Back to Index |
This is a translated version (the original being in French) of one person's view of the demonstration against the G-20 in Montreal, Quebec and the police brutality that followed.
Special thanks to Dee of COBP
Yesterday, on October 23, 2000, hundreds of demonstrators were gathered in front of the Sheraton centre in Montreal (Rene-Levesque St.) to protest against the meeting of the G-20 (composed of finance ministers and bank executives of 19 countries as well as leaders of the World Bank and the IMF).
The police presence was powerful but subtle. All the entrances at the centre were closed with "anti-riot" fences and with fully equipped anti-riot police lines. Stanley Street which is situated to the east of the Sheraton Centre was totally blocked off with a police barricade, most likely to avoid blockage of this place like during Operation Salami not so long ago.
Your present humble narrator estimates that there were around 100 police officers present during the whole police operation. But one had to look for them. Hidden at a street corner farther away or ditched inside the Centre itself, it didn't seem that they wanted their numbers spoken about.
The demonstration began building up around 4 p.m. and progressively grew with demonstrators of all ages, sex and origins. Disguises and the music were at the meeting under the boisterous drum rhythms. Many people made speeches that explained the demonstration. The Sheraton was joyfully showered with diverse objects such as paint bombs, pebbles, graffitti and placards, all of which were inoffensive. Many black flags flapped in the wind and one felt an extraordinary ambience. There were around 500 people, but I'm not too good at estimating crowds.
At one point, many demonstrators headed for the west side of the building (Drummond St.) where a police line of 20 officers blocked the parking entrance with barricades. Insults and divers objects (eggs, paint etc.) lovingly rained down on the police line-up there. At one point, demonstrators began to manoeuvre some containers towards the centre of the street. One was set afire, letting off an atrocious odour. This container was pushed against a vehicle from the regional corporate TV station TVA.
A few minutes later the police sounded the charge, backed up with the police cavalry. Quite brutally they forced the crowd back which for a moment created a panic where some people started to run. The cops, not being content with freeing the "poor" garbage containers from the "mean demonstrators" pushed the demonstrators to the street exit on Rene-Levesque. The demonstrators didn't back down until the police used pepper spray, especially on those on the front lines. A smoke bomb then exploded behind the police line, pushing back with good efficiency the cavalry which was still reinforcing the police line.
At this moment, some demonstrators, probably enraged by the violence with which the cops had attacked the demonstrators, began throwing objects of all sorts at the police: bricks, stones, bottles, etc. pushing back one more time the cavalry, but the cops on foot didn't budge under their heavy anti-riot armour and shields. Some persons tried to go between the projectiles and the cops yelling "We don't want your riot" and, curiously, doing this with their backs against the police...
The police didn't play this game for very long. In a flash they charged, clubbing indiscriminately at whomever they found in front of them. This was followed by the cavalry charging which was received by another shower of objects, but these being from a group of about 40-50 people who were separated from the rest of the group, which was still large. From one side of Drummond street to the west of Sheraton, one found this fifty some-odd group of people, which included a good 10 money-grubbing journalists of all sorts, about 10 people who were throwing objects, and the rest, demonstrators with banners and placards.
These demonstrators on the west side of Drummond street and the cops (sometimes on horseback, sometimes on foot) exchanged thrown objects and charged crazily to and fro (it is probably from there that came the images of the cavalry shown on TV). It should be noted that many people didn't throw anything. At this point, after the charge, about 30 people sat down in the street facing the police. The police advanced, staying in a line and from there some persons withdrew and there remained only 15 people who were slowly encircled by the police line. Other, more lucid demonstrators were warning them to get under cover.
I deplore the fact that these people were also arrested, not because they didn't do anything (it was clear that the cops didn't want a motive), but because they didn't stand up and get the hell out of there when they had the chance. As a consequence there were comments such as "So this is what happens when you're a pacifist" deplorable enough according to me. Because I consider myself as a pacifist, but I will not let myself be stupidly arrested in the street like that. Pacifism is not equal to being passive.
Without rapidly jumping to any conclusions this is the sort of thing that our friend Duhamel extols, and it seems to have some sort of "cohesion" or rather an organisation, a hierarchy in the group that gets arrested. A comical person walked in front of them saying: "we seat down, we lie down". Like at mass. I find that the people who were arrested could have avoided it, that they were not fully aware of the situation, and so were prevented from making a well thought out decision. However, I see that Duhamel disassociated himself from the demo (which was foreseeable) without supplementary explanations. It is clear that this clown used the misery of others to glorify his own definition of "non-violence"(*). And obviously, one will not find him anywhere to defend these "non-violents" (which I will call from now on the " pacivists ") who followed their own tactics.
I believe that these people will be accused of illegal gathering (unlawful assembly) and/or participation in a riot. And this will accentuate the already existing division between "non-violent" and "violent" protestors in the movement. I would not be surprised if this is a tactic of the cops. It is to their advantage to use these easy labels of "violent" and "non-violent" which the media attributes without any reflection that should be associated with it. These futile denunciations are going to fly from one side to another. All this will do is accentuate the police tactics.
Back to what we were talking about. At this moment of my narration, the passives were being encircled, and about thirty demonstrators who had got away remained in order to chant their solidarity (even so...) and ask for the immediate liberation of these people, and during this time the demo was contained in front of the Sheraton blocked by a police line.
Stronger pressure was put on the cops who had encircled people and the cavalry and cops on foot charged again, clubbing and running down everyone in their way and pushing the demonstrators one street more to the west. The "journalists"(***) remained on the sides of the street, in the parking, and were equally evacuated by the cavalry. So well that nobody could really see up close what was happening during the arrests taking place. As well, many demonstrators then decided to meet up with the rest of the demo in front of the Sheraton.
The last thing that I saw of the passives was the arrival of a bus in penitentiary blue ready to load up demonstrators (probably) for the Centre Operationel Sud [translator's note: one of Montreal's four holding cells] situated some street corners away.
Getting back to the demo in front of the Sheraton, at this moment, the ardour of the demonstrators had not cooled down. Intimidation, no thanks. Despite many warnings made in the megaphone giving out information to what the cops would probably try to encircle the rest of the demo, the drums continued to play and the slogans continued to be chanted.
All this until the cavalry subtly went between two street corners to the east of the Sheraton. Alerted, the demo then began to leave the facade of the Sheraton in order to march toward the east of Rene-Levesque. Things started to happen quickly. The traffic having not been blocked off two corners towards the east, we found ourselves amongst the cars, thinking to be sheltered from the cavalry. Contrarily, the cavalry then blocked the next intersection, our exit, as well as in the meantime the anti-riot were coming from behind. Many people dispersed in the Dorchester square on the north end and on the south end, while most of the demo (maybe then 100 to 200 strong at that time) went to the south on De La Cathedrale street. I then left in Bonaventure metro station, running out of flash and energy.
From what I heard, demonstrators were progressively dispersed into the neighbouring streets, but I think that it would be important to confirm these arrests and the police violence that took place this evening.
Important to note is that during the demo the police never gave any audible warning that I noticed. The word of the day was "MOVE" while brandishing their truncheons or when charging on horseback. No justification. No explication. Pure and simple.
(*) A non-violence : I heard someone say that some people (demonstrators) put themselves in between when people did some graffittis on the building and, ridiculously, in the name of non-violence... Again, a joyous masquerade on semantics : does violence occur when it is against material objects? I don't believe so. Moreover, I understood that this was the opinion of the organisers.
(**) The word arrest has lost some of its meaning these days. Legally, an arrestee should have his/her rights read, have the right to see a lawyer, know the exact charge, etc. Nowadays, we know that we're arrested when we get handcuffed or simply circled by police...
(***) About journalists: Our so precious freedom of press, our so glorified information... It is still only TQS [Translator's note : TQS stands for the acronym for a local private TV station recently bought by the company who owns the biggest newspaper of the province. The Quebecor co. just bought also Videotron, the biggest cable company in the province that owned the other French-language private TV station in the provincial market. The author equates the TQS acronym for " dirty asshole ".] this art that finds itself in newspapers, on TV. Because it is with this that we make it stick, because we bombard people with violence, big guns and riots, so they ask for more. The media's coverage that I saw on the TV adds up to this: "Yet another clash between protesters and the police" (CBC). And this isn't surprising.
There is a major difference between the witness of yesterday's events as seen on tv and an eyewitness. The tv watcher will see the cavalry come just in time to scare the indians and to save the carrier full of gold whereas the one on the field will see a big horse conducted by a cowboy on PCP charge on demonstrators with an extreme violence. The former brings interest and exacerbates the perceptions, like a video game, the latter creates fear and breeds anger.
Same thing on the journalist's side... When they enjoy immunity from police repression, they're often very collaborative and see the whole thing from a different standpoint than the one they share with everybody when they get ordinary treatment. And one thing leads to another. The harsher the police interventions, the less journalists will be able to hide it, and the more the journalists will get the treatment " same as the others ". In other words, as long as you are behind the lines, police will be nice, if you look the other way, but when you do your real job, they become less "friendly".
A colleague has been labelled as enemy by a "journalist" because he was wearing a mask and was taking pictures at the same time. What a surprise...
In solidarity with the arrested!
Death to capitalism, death to G20, death to the IMF!
Long Live Anarchy!
L'anarchat.
Although this press release was originally written on Oct. 28th, the three demonstrators still remain behind bars and won't be appearing before the Superieur Court until Nov. 7th - where they'll try to fight for bail conditions.
Since the demonstration against the G-20 meeting here in Montreal, authorities in Quebec City are preparing for (or better yet said declaring war against) future protestors at the upcoming Summit of the Americas meeting in Quebec City (April 2001). The police will be increasing the riot squad from 150 to 800. Orsainville prison will be emptied during the Summit to make room for protestors. A four kilometer square area of Quebec City (wherein the conference will take place) will be blocked off except for residents. Residents will have to have (or get) ID with their address on it for proof of residence. Also NO ONE (and this includes family and friends of those living in the restricted area) will be able to go into this zone without proof of residence - except of course those attending the Summit of the Americas meeting. Members of the Surete du Quebec (Quebec's Provincial police force) are presently undertaking paramilitary training for this upcoming demonstration. In fact this will be the most expensive police operation in the history of Canada - $ 35,000,000. The State will even be reimbursing local stores that may or will lose money (because of the closed off 4 square kilometer zone) when the Summit of the Americas will be held!
MONTREAL, October 28, 2000 -- This past Wednesday afternoon, at the urging of the crown prosecutor, bail was denied to three young demonstrators who participated in the street party and protest against the G-20 conference last Monday outside the Sheraton Hotel. Daniel Carriere, 18, is currently being detained at Bordeaux prison, while Stephane Blais, 18, and Kevin Spillane, 25, are being detained at the Rivieres-des-Prairies prison. Their next bail hearing is not expected for at least another two weeks, during which time they will remain behind bars.
The legal support team of the G-20 Welcoming Committee -- which organized Monday's street party (October 23, 2000) -- are in touch with the lawyers of the three detained protestors. As soon as we learn of their next bail hearing, that information will be passed on to supporters. We intend to fill the courtroom at the hearing to show our solidarity with our fellow demonstrators, and to protest their unjust imprisonment. If you would like to be informed about the upcoming court date, send email or phone 514-278-4533 and leave a message.
In denying bail to the demonstrators, Quebec Court Judge Locas reasoned that the anti-G-20 demonstration was "anti-social" and that any attacks on police are anti-democratic since "police are the guardians of democracy."
Normally, to deny bail and keep someone in custody, the court must accept that the prisoner is either a danger to society, a risk to flee before their next court date, or that their release would undermine confidence in Canada's justice system. Judge Locas openly admitted that the three demonstrators were neither a risk to society nor a risk to flee. However, he argued that since police were allegedly under attack at Monday's demonstration, the release of the three protestors would undermine confidence of the legal system and the Canadian state, especially in the eyes of international public opinion. The G-20 conference was comprised of the finance ministers and bank governors of 19 nations, as well as the heads of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
The three demonstrators face a range of charges from Monday's demonstration, the most serious of which is armed assault on a police officer. The charge really means that the three demonstrators are alleged to have thrown rocks or other projectiles at riot police. To put the continued imprisonment of the three youth in some context, before their bail hearing, two other prisoners, unrelated to any political protest, were released on bail. Their alleged crime was to have used a handgun with bullets to threaten people in a bar.
The continued detention of Daniel, Stephane and Kevin is an outrage when compared to the way more serious crimes are treated. Police officers who are charged with manslaughter routinely receive bail. Daniel, Stephane and Kevin's imprisonment is clearly politically motivated, and they are being made scapegoats for the so-called "riot" last Monday. The G-20 Welcoming Committee has already publicly denounced the police actions on October 23 as really a "police riot". The police arbitrarily deployed horses against the demonstration, and riot police beat on demonstrators, even those who were fleeing or offering medical help to pepper-sprayed victims.
Kevin Spillane has apparently no criminal record, while Daniel Carriere and Stephane Blais are just eighteen. Stephane is also a contributor to Suspectus Magazine, a locally published zine that addresses the concerns of street youth and other marginalized groups. In prison, he was expressing his eagerness to write an article about the G-20 for the next issue of Suspectus. In all three cases, the demonstrators are presumed innocent until found guilty, and the charge of armed assault against the police should certainly be seen in the context of police violence aimed at protestors during last Monday's demonstration.
In total, 39 people were arrested last Monday after a violent intervention by police horses and the riot squad armed with helmets, shield and batons. Aside from the three protestors who are still detained, everyone else has been released. They face charges ranging from participating in a riot, to being part of an "illegal gathering." These are vague catch-all charges, which could apply to any one of the 800-1000 people who attended last Monday's street protest. These kinds of charges have been used before to justify mass and arbitrary arrests in Montreal.
One demonstrator, Jaggi Singh of the G-20 Welcoming Committee, was singled out for arrest after the demonstration, away from the Sheraton Center. He was detained for over 48 hours, including a night at Rivieres-des-Prairies prison. At a separate bail hearing, the crown urged Singh's continued detention until trial (meaning imprisonment for at least a month) on the grounds that he constitutes "a risk to public security". Singh has no violent record, and his charges from last Monday's demonstration make no mention of any specific acts beyond the vague charges of participating in an illegal gathering, and participating in a riot. He spent much of the demonstration handing out informational flyers, chanting slogans, as well as talking with other demonstrators.
However, Sergeant-Detective Poletti of the Montreal Police testified under oath at the bail hearing that Singh's speech to the crowd at the demonstration "incited a riot". Poletti did not cite any specific words and referred instead to the "tone of the speech" that resulted in "cheers and applause". As it is, Singh is not even being charged with inciting a riot, but Poletti's false testimony was clearly aimed to keep him in prison for an extended period.
Singh, who represented himself before the court, was able to successfully argue for his release, but must abide by strict bail conditions that impede his ability to protest effectively in the province of Quebec.
For more information, or to stay in touch about legal support, please e-mail stopftaa-mtl@tao.ca or phone 514-278-4533. This communique was prepared by members of the G-20 Welcoming Committee legal support team. Information about the upcoming bail hearing, as well as the wrap-up assembly for the G-20 Welcoming Committee, will be posted in the upcoming days.
These articles appear with the blessing of the authors.
This entire report sounds so much like what happened in Toronto, June 15, 2000. As the cops learn from each other so must activists learn and be better prepared in the future. - Ed.
Send your comments and stories of police brutality to: ruitsdawtah@Hotmail.com
This page created December 4,2000
