21st March 2007

Freedom to Protest Court Case

Chris Osmond, campaigner against Brighton arms manufacturer EDO MBM, will be in Brighton Magistrates court tomorrow charged with 'inciting another to breach a police order'.

The protester was arrested at a demonstration in North St on 12th August 2005 after the police allegedly imposed conditions on the demonstration under Section 12 of the Public Order Act.

Sarah Johnson, spokeperson for Smash EDO said 'On the 12th August 2005 the police misused their powers by stopping a peaceful demonstration against the production of arms. Their actions were contrary to articles 10 and 11 of the Human Rights Act'

The defence have argued that Mr Osmond was targeted for arrest as a longterm campaigner and a litigant in person in high court proceedings.

The case is the last prosecution to arise out of the civil injunction EDO MBM attempted to obtain to criminalise protest outside their factory in Mouslecoomb.

In March 2006 the Crown Prosecution Service were forced to drop, or failed in, 23 criminal prosecutions after a court case in Febuary came

Smash EDO are planning a picket of Brighton Magistrate's Court on Friday 23rd March at 1pm

Pictures available on Request

Smash EDO demonstrate every Wednesday at EDO, 4-6pm, on Home Farm Road, Brighton

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.

back to top