smashEDO

19th July 2007

Activist Arrested under Council Bylaw

At a peaceful demonstration against Brighton arms company EDO MBM yesterday a protester was arrested and a sound system seized in the latest show of force by Sussex police. Police used an obscure council bylaw which has never been used in a prosecution to confiscate the equipment. Last week the same protester had charges for a public order offence dropped after having to spend two days in court.

The weekly protest was policed by around 10 police officers including two inspectors and an evidence gathering team filming the protest.

Sussex police have made over 40 arrests during the three-year campaign against the US-owned bomb component manufacturer EDO MBM, the vast majority of which have resulted in acquittals or charges being dropped. As well as the two activists who had charges against them dropped last week, two protesters who staged a rooftop demo at the EDO MBM factory against Israel's bombardment of Lebanon last year won their court case last month.

Spokeswoman Sarah Johnson said 'Despite Sussex Police repeatedly failing in their attempts to criminalise peaceful protest they continue to target activists who demonstrate against a company on their doorstep responsible for war crimes committed across the globe. We refuse to be intimidated and will continue our campaign against EDO MBM until they shut down.'

Notes for Journalists

Brighton & Hove is a UN Peace Messenger City

The injunction referred to was served under the 1997 Protection from Harassment Act (originally designed to protect women from stalkers) and is the first of its kind directed at activists outside of the animal rights movement. Crucially it is a civil injunction but carries criminal penalties. It affects anyone deemed to be a protestor. Initially EDO/MBM requested a large "exclusion zone" comprising the whole of Home Farm Industrial Estate.

They and Sussex police also wanted to limit demonstrations to two and a half hours, with less thanten people who had to be silent. Judge Gross refusedto impose these conditions at the initial hearing of an interim injunction, which was put in place in the period before the full trial to be heard at the High court in London from November 21st. In his summing up he said, "The right to freedom of expression is jealously guarded in English law" and consequently refused to impose the requested limits on size, timing or noise made at demonstrations. He also said that he doubted that protesters were 'stalking' employees of EDO MBM.

EDO MBM Technologies Ltd are the sole UK subsidiary of huge U.S arms conglomerate EDO Corp, which was recently named No. 10 in the Forbes list of 100 fastest growing companies. They supply bomb release mechanisms to the US and UK armed forces amongstothers. They supply crucial components for Raytheon's Paveway guided bomb system, widely used in the "Shock and Awe" campaign in Iraq .

EDO also withdrew a threatened libel action against Indymedia over being named as "warmongers".

Lawson-Cruttenden & Co
Solicitors firm working for EDO have been instrumental in developing the Protection of Harassment Act 1997 from a measure designed to safeguard individuals to a corporate charter to make inconvenient protest illegal. Theyhave pioneered to use of injunctions to create large "exclusion zones". They have secured numerous injunctions against anti-vivisection and anti-GM protestors.

Campaign against EDO MBM
People involved in the anti-EDO campaign include, but are not limited to: local residents, the Brighton Quakers, peace activists, anti-capitalists, Palestine Solidarity groups, human rights groups, trade unionists, academics and students. The campaign started in August 2004 with a peace camp. It's avowed aim is to expose EDO MBM and their complicity in war crimes and to remove them from Brighton.