smashEDO

17th July 2007

Police drop Prosecutions against Two Anti Arms Trade Activists

Sussex police have dropped prosecutions against Dan Glass, head of Sussex University Students' Union, and Marcus Wise, anti-arms trade activists involved in protests against Brighton arms manufacturers EDO MBM.

Both were arrested, on two separate occasions, under Section 5 of the 1986 Public Order Act (for using language or behaviour intended to cause harassment alarm or distress). The arrests were made in connection with regular demonstrations outside the factory. The prosecution of Marcus Wise had already resulted in two day in court in preparation for trial.

Sarah Johnson, Spokeswoman for Smash EDO, said 'Sussex Police have failed in another attempt to suppress freedom of expression. Dan and Marcus were exercising their right to freedom of speech and were targeted for arrest. The police are attempting to criminalise protesters engaging in criticism of employees of EDO MBM.'

Sussex Police have made nearly forty arrests in the course of the four year campaign against EDO MBM. The vast majority of these arrests have led to acquittals or charges being dropped.

Andrew Beckett, of Smash EDO, said 'The Police and Crown Prosecution Service are spending massive amounts of public money on politically motivated prosecutions of protesters. They have consistently failed in these attempted prosecutions and they will not succeed in intimidating us, we will continue campaigning against EDO MBM until it closes 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.