Fears police tactics at G20 protests will lead to violence
• Met warns of G20 clashes and says officers 'up for it'
• Protest groups raise concerns as thousands set to march
Paul Lewis, Sandra Laville, John Vidal | March 27, 2009
Tens of thousands of protesters are expected to march through London tomorrow ahead of the G20 summit, amid mounting concern that over-aggressive police tactics may incite violence when world leaders gather to discuss the global economic meltdown.
Yesterday, the Metropolitan police was understood to have contacted a number of protest groups warning that the main day of protest, Wednesday, 1 April would be "very violent", and senior commanders have insisted that they are "up for it, and up to it", should there be any trouble.
The force has refused to rule out the use of anti-terror legislation, with Sir Paul Stephenson, the Met commissioner, conceding that the week ahead, in which President Barack Obama will lead a cortege of other world leaders to the UK, will be the Met's greatest challenge.
Senior officers insist there is intelligence that some activists demonstrating against climate change, capitalism, war and globalisation are intent on violence and will try to disrupt the summit. They say that some troublemakers who were active in the 1990s have emerged once more, and that chatter between groups shows they are forging alliances to take their message to world leaders. Some protesters have also promised to storm buildings, taking out their anger over the collapse of the capitalist economy with direct action designed to bring London to a standstill.
However, David Howarth, a Liberal Democrat MP who is leading a parliamentary group of observers at the protests next week, said: "I am increasingly worried that what the police are saying about the protests will end up in a self-fulfilling prophecy. By talking up the prospect of violence they will put off peaceful demonstrators and start to attract other sorts."
Andrew Dismore MP, who chairs the joint common human rights, said police language in recent days had been "not very helpful".
"The police have a duty under the Human Rights Act to facilitate protest and not frustrate it. If they act in a confrontational way and use confrontation language, they will start to provoke the kind of behaviour they are seeking to prevent. There may well be a fringe element that want to incite violence. But that doesn't mean police should criminalise every protester."
The direct action group Climate Camp – which is organising a mass overnight camp in the Square Mile on Wednesday night – claimed yesterday that it had tried to talk to the Met, but its efforts at dialogue had been ignored. Lawyers acting for the group contacted City of London police on 10 March. In correspondence seen by the Guardian, solicitors said they were "willing to liaise" and requested names and contact details of officers.
Subsequent requests have been made with the Metropolitan police. An email sent from the Met on Tuesday said their request had been forwarded to the operation command unit for consideration.
"We've been constantly frustrated by our attempts to talk to the police about the 1st of April," said Climate Camp's Liz Shaw. "They don't return our letters, they say that they'll call us back, and they prevent us from attending public meetings they are speaking at. Surely they would want to enter into some sort of dialogue with us in advance of the event."
Last night Scotland Yard denied that it had received any communication from the group and said it had been looking forward to hearing from them.
The police operation over the next week will involve thousands of officers from six forces. Commander Bob Broadhurst of the Metropolitan police, who is in overall charge, admitted his officers would be at full stretch.
They face the multiple challenges of protecting visitors such as Obama, who is on his first presidential trip to Britain, and allowing the public to demonstrate.
The first test may come tomorrow at the Put People First march to Hyde Park, which is organised by a coalition of more than 100 trade unions, churches ,charities and campaign groups marching under the banner "jobs, justice and climate".
TUC general secretary Brendan Barber will say at the rally: "It is right to be angry as there is nothing inevitable about this recession … Today is the birth of a powerful progressive voice."
There was also anger tonight over the cost of the summit after Foreign Office minister Lord Malloch-Brown disclosed the bill for staging the conference stands at £19m.
But Gordon Brown yesterday urged voters not to be cynical about the outcome of the G20, saying he had not travelled the globe this week simply to publish a communique.
Downing Street aides suggested that there may be a follow-up G20 summit in six months, which may also revisit the issue of whether there should be a further international co-ordinated stimulus in 2010.
Lord Malloch-Brown, Gordon Brown's G20 envoy, said yesterday it was "likely" there will need to be a stimulus in 2010, adding the test of the summit will be whether the recession is shallower and shorter than it would have otherwise been.
Guardian : Police officers in abuse case accused of 60 other assaults
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Police officers in abuse case accused of 60 other assaults
Met reveals four were subject of dozens of allegations by black or Asian men
Matthew Taylor and Sandra Laville | March 21, 2009
Police officers involved in a "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" attack on a British Muslim man that led the Metropolitan police to pay £60,000 in damages this week have been accused of dozens of previous assaults against black or Asian men.
Babar Ahmad, 34, a terrorist suspect, was punched, kicked, stamped on and strangled during his arrest by officers from one of the Met's territorial support groups at his London home in December 2003.
After six years of denials from Scotland Yard, lawyers acting for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, were forced to admit in the high court that Ahmad had been the victim of sustained and gratuitous violence during his arrest and agreed to pay £60,000 in damages.
But the Guardian can reveal that the Met was aware for years that the six officers involved were the subject of repeated complaints. According to documents submitted to the court, four of the officers who carried out the raid on Ahmad's home had 60 allegations of assault against them - of which at least 37 were made by black or Asian men. One of the officers had 26 separate allegations of assault against him - 17 against black or Asian men.
The Met has confirmed that since 1992 all six officers involved in the Ahmad assault had been subject to at least 77 complaints. When lawyers for Ahmad asked for details of these allegations it emerged that the police had "lost" several large mail sacks detailing at least 30 of the complaints.
Senior figures in Scotland Yard admit there are concerns about the conduct of the officers. Although the Independent Police Complaints Commission supervised an investigation carried out by the Met, none of the officers has been disciplined for the assault on Ahmad and all but one are still working in the territorial support group. Asked about the string of allegations against the officers, the Met said that all but one had been found to be unsubstantiated following inquiries.
However Fiona Murphy, the lawyer representing Ahmad, said the number of complaints should have led to a thorough inquiry.
"The horrifying nature and volume of complaints against these officers should have provoked an effective response from the Metropolitan police and the IPCC long ago," she said.
Documents submitted to the high court and seen by the Guardian list details of some of the alleged assaults carried out by the officers:
• March 2007: one officer is accused of bundling a man into the back of a police van where he was told to "get on his knees". When he replied this was not Guantánamo Bay he claims the officer grabbed him round the neck and "discharged his CS gas while continuing to hold his throat". He says he was then thrown from the van, leaving him with eye, neck and head injuries. According to the document no action was taken because the complaint was either "incapable of proof" or there was "no case to answer".
• November 2005: two of the officers were accused by a "black male" of attacking him in the back of a police van. The document states that he was subjected to "constant kicking to his head and stomach (approx 12 kicks). Head lifted off the floor by grabbing his right ear and lifting head." The attack left the man with bruising and swelling to his face but the case was not pursued, the Met said, because of "non-cooperation" by the complainant.
• October 2005: the document stated that two of the officers were involved in another assault on a "black male". It read: "In van repeatedly assaulted - kicks to the face, stamps on his head whilst handcuffed." The victim said afterwards he "felt like he might die". Vomiting and blood coming out of his ears, black swollen eye, lip busted, hands very swollen.
• June 2003: two officers accused of beating a "black male" in the back of the TSG van. "The beating continued in the van and in a search room at the station."
The allegations against the officers came to light after the high court issued a disclosure order on 13 February demanding that the Metropolitan police release all "similar fact allegations" against the officers involved in the Ahmad case.
The Met's legal team wrote to Ahmad's lawyers a few weeks later to say that "because of the sheer volume of unsubstantiated complaints" against the officers they would only be able to provide a schedule of the claims rather than the files in time for the deadline.
The schedule outlining 77 separate complaints against the officers was subsequently submitted to the court, along with a sample of complaints taken from 27 files containing some of the allegations. The police said they had lost several large mail sacks detailing at least 30 other files.
During the hearing it emerged that other crucial documents, including the officers' contemporaneous notebooks and a taped recording of an interview with the senior officer in the case, had also been mislaid.
Ahmad's lawyers say they are now calling for a judicial inquiry into the case and seeking a criminal prosecution against the officers involved. Murphy said: "The failure of the Metropolitan police and the IPCC to take effective action long ago against this group of officers can only be addressed by a full judicial inquiry and we will invite the director of public prosecutions to support the family's call for an independent judicial inquiry."
Scotland Yard said that all but one of the 77 allegations against the six TSG officers had been found to be unsubstantiated, because the complainant failed to assist them any further, the complaint was withdrawn or informally resolved, or investigated and found to be unsubstantiated.
The Met said the Directorate of Professional Standards was investigating the missing mail sacks containing 30 complaint dockets. Sources played down the significance of the allegations against the officers, indicating that all TSG officers are often the subject of complaints because of the nature of their job as frontline officers who police public disorder as well as having an anti-terrorism role.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has now been asked to investigate why two of the officers refused orders to give evidence in the Ahmad case at the high court.
The Metropolitan Police Authority said: "The MPA will not tolerate racism or unnecessary force and we are very concerned about the impact this case will have on community police relations in London."
Ahmad was arrested at his home in south-west London. The court heard how officers stamped on his feet and repeatedly punched him in the head before he was forced into the Muslim prayer position when they shouted: "Where is your God now? Pray to him."
After a sustained attack, he was forced into the back of a police van, where he was again beaten and punched before being put in a "life-threatening" neck hold and told: "You will remember this day for the rest of your life."
At one stage, one of the officers grabbed his testicles and he was also deliberately wrenched by his handcuffs - a technique known to cause intense pain.
He has been in detention since he was rearrested in 2004 after a request from the US government over claims that he helped raise money to fund terrorist campaigns. The court heard that no evidence had been produced against Ahmad, and that he had never been charged with any offence.
Frontline force
Created in January 1987, the territorial support group is on the frontline of policing in the capital, and its 720 officers are often the first on the scene of major disturbances. TSG units have policed every march and demonstration in London over the past two decades, including the poll tax protests, BNP disturbances and "stop the City" demonstrations. They also provide anti-terrorism support and have firearm and taser expertise. They will be on the frontline again next month when they help to police protesters who are expected to gather for the G20 summit in London.
Met reveals four were subject of dozens of allegations by black or Asian men
Matthew Taylor and Sandra Laville | March 21, 2009
Police officers involved in a "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" attack on a British Muslim man that led the Metropolitan police to pay £60,000 in damages this week have been accused of dozens of previous assaults against black or Asian men.
Babar Ahmad, 34, a terrorist suspect, was punched, kicked, stamped on and strangled during his arrest by officers from one of the Met's territorial support groups at his London home in December 2003.
After six years of denials from Scotland Yard, lawyers acting for the Metropolitan police commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, were forced to admit in the high court that Ahmad had been the victim of sustained and gratuitous violence during his arrest and agreed to pay £60,000 in damages.
But the Guardian can reveal that the Met was aware for years that the six officers involved were the subject of repeated complaints. According to documents submitted to the court, four of the officers who carried out the raid on Ahmad's home had 60 allegations of assault against them - of which at least 37 were made by black or Asian men. One of the officers had 26 separate allegations of assault against him - 17 against black or Asian men.
The Met has confirmed that since 1992 all six officers involved in the Ahmad assault had been subject to at least 77 complaints. When lawyers for Ahmad asked for details of these allegations it emerged that the police had "lost" several large mail sacks detailing at least 30 of the complaints.
Senior figures in Scotland Yard admit there are concerns about the conduct of the officers. Although the Independent Police Complaints Commission supervised an investigation carried out by the Met, none of the officers has been disciplined for the assault on Ahmad and all but one are still working in the territorial support group. Asked about the string of allegations against the officers, the Met said that all but one had been found to be unsubstantiated following inquiries.
However Fiona Murphy, the lawyer representing Ahmad, said the number of complaints should have led to a thorough inquiry.
"The horrifying nature and volume of complaints against these officers should have provoked an effective response from the Metropolitan police and the IPCC long ago," she said.
Documents submitted to the high court and seen by the Guardian list details of some of the alleged assaults carried out by the officers:
• March 2007: one officer is accused of bundling a man into the back of a police van where he was told to "get on his knees". When he replied this was not Guantánamo Bay he claims the officer grabbed him round the neck and "discharged his CS gas while continuing to hold his throat". He says he was then thrown from the van, leaving him with eye, neck and head injuries. According to the document no action was taken because the complaint was either "incapable of proof" or there was "no case to answer".
• November 2005: two of the officers were accused by a "black male" of attacking him in the back of a police van. The document states that he was subjected to "constant kicking to his head and stomach (approx 12 kicks). Head lifted off the floor by grabbing his right ear and lifting head." The attack left the man with bruising and swelling to his face but the case was not pursued, the Met said, because of "non-cooperation" by the complainant.
• October 2005: the document stated that two of the officers were involved in another assault on a "black male". It read: "In van repeatedly assaulted - kicks to the face, stamps on his head whilst handcuffed." The victim said afterwards he "felt like he might die". Vomiting and blood coming out of his ears, black swollen eye, lip busted, hands very swollen.
• June 2003: two officers accused of beating a "black male" in the back of the TSG van. "The beating continued in the van and in a search room at the station."
The allegations against the officers came to light after the high court issued a disclosure order on 13 February demanding that the Metropolitan police release all "similar fact allegations" against the officers involved in the Ahmad case.
The Met's legal team wrote to Ahmad's lawyers a few weeks later to say that "because of the sheer volume of unsubstantiated complaints" against the officers they would only be able to provide a schedule of the claims rather than the files in time for the deadline.
The schedule outlining 77 separate complaints against the officers was subsequently submitted to the court, along with a sample of complaints taken from 27 files containing some of the allegations. The police said they had lost several large mail sacks detailing at least 30 other files.
During the hearing it emerged that other crucial documents, including the officers' contemporaneous notebooks and a taped recording of an interview with the senior officer in the case, had also been mislaid.
Ahmad's lawyers say they are now calling for a judicial inquiry into the case and seeking a criminal prosecution against the officers involved. Murphy said: "The failure of the Metropolitan police and the IPCC to take effective action long ago against this group of officers can only be addressed by a full judicial inquiry and we will invite the director of public prosecutions to support the family's call for an independent judicial inquiry."
Scotland Yard said that all but one of the 77 allegations against the six TSG officers had been found to be unsubstantiated, because the complainant failed to assist them any further, the complaint was withdrawn or informally resolved, or investigated and found to be unsubstantiated.
The Met said the Directorate of Professional Standards was investigating the missing mail sacks containing 30 complaint dockets. Sources played down the significance of the allegations against the officers, indicating that all TSG officers are often the subject of complaints because of the nature of their job as frontline officers who police public disorder as well as having an anti-terrorism role.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission has now been asked to investigate why two of the officers refused orders to give evidence in the Ahmad case at the high court.
The Metropolitan Police Authority said: "The MPA will not tolerate racism or unnecessary force and we are very concerned about the impact this case will have on community police relations in London."
Ahmad was arrested at his home in south-west London. The court heard how officers stamped on his feet and repeatedly punched him in the head before he was forced into the Muslim prayer position when they shouted: "Where is your God now? Pray to him."
After a sustained attack, he was forced into the back of a police van, where he was again beaten and punched before being put in a "life-threatening" neck hold and told: "You will remember this day for the rest of your life."
At one stage, one of the officers grabbed his testicles and he was also deliberately wrenched by his handcuffs - a technique known to cause intense pain.
He has been in detention since he was rearrested in 2004 after a request from the US government over claims that he helped raise money to fund terrorist campaigns. The court heard that no evidence had been produced against Ahmad, and that he had never been charged with any offence.
Frontline force
Created in January 1987, the territorial support group is on the frontline of policing in the capital, and its 720 officers are often the first on the scene of major disturbances. TSG units have policed every march and demonstration in London over the past two decades, including the poll tax protests, BNP disturbances and "stop the City" demonstrations. They also provide anti-terrorism support and have firearm and taser expertise. They will be on the frontline again next month when they help to police protesters who are expected to gather for the G20 summit in London.
Guardian : Metropolitan police pays Muslim man £60,000 damages over 'serious attack'
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Metropolitan police pays Muslim man £60,000 damages over 'serious attack'
Babar Ahmad was subjected to prolonged, repeated assaults and religious insults during arrest in south London, high court hears
Matthew Taylor and Rachel Williams | March 18, 2009
The Metropolitan police today agreed to pay £60,000 damages to a British Muslim after a high court admission that officers had subjected him to "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" attack.
The court was told that Babar Ahmad, who is accused of raising funds for terrorism, had been punched, kicked and throttled during his arrest by officers from the force's territorial support group in December 2003.
The Met had repeatedly denied the claims, saying officers had used reasonable force during the arrest.
However, lawyers for the force's commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, today admitted at the high court that Ahmad had been the victim of gratuitous and sustained violence at his home in Tooting, south-west London.
"The commissioner has today admitted that his officers subjected Babar Ahmad to grave abuse tantamount to torture during his arrest," Ahmad's solicitor, Fiona Murphy, said outside the court.
During the hearing, it emerged that the Met had lost "a number of large mail sacks" containing details of other similar allegations against the officers who assaulted Ahmad.
Murphy said the few documents that had not been mislaid should have triggered a thorough investigation.
"The horrifying nature and volume of complaints against these officers should have provoked an effective response from the Metropolitan police and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) long ago," she said.
"Instead, it has fallen to Babar Ahmad to bring these proceedings to achieve public recognition of the wrong that was done to him."
She said other crucial documents relating to the case were also lost.
They included all the officers' contemporaneous notebooks and the taped recording of an interview with the senior officer in the case.
Murphy added: "The papers will be referred to the director of public prosecutions for urgent consideration of criminal charges against the officers concerned and for an investigation as to whether events surrounding the mislaid mail sacks constitute evidence of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice."
During his arrest, Ahmad was punched, kicked and throttled, the court heard.
Officers stamped on the 34-year-old's feet and repeatedly punched him in the head before he was forced into the Muslim prayer position and they shouted: "Where is your God now? Pray to him."
After a sustained attack, he was forced into the back of a police van, where he was again beaten and punched before being put in a "life-threatening" neck hold and told: "You will remember this day for the rest of your life."
At one stage, one of the officers grabbed his testicles and he was also deliberately wrenched by his handcuffs – a technique known to cause intense pain.
Outside the court, Ahmad's brother-in-law, Fahad Ahmad, read out a statement on his behalf in which he said he was pleased the police had finally admitted what had happened.
"This abuse took place not in Guantánamo Bay or a secret torture chamber but in Tooting, south London," the statement said.
"The path to justice is long and difficult but, as long as you remain steadfast upon it, you will get there in the end."
Ahmad has been in detention since he was rearrested in 2004 after a request from the US government over claims he helped raise money to fund terrorist campaigns.
The court heard that no evidence had been produced against Ahmad, and he had never been charged with any offence.
He is now fighting extradition to the US in the European courts.
An IPCC investigation in 2007 ended with no action being taken against any officer.
Babar Ahmad was subjected to prolonged, repeated assaults and religious insults during arrest in south London, high court hears
Matthew Taylor and Rachel Williams | March 18, 2009
The Metropolitan police today agreed to pay £60,000 damages to a British Muslim after a high court admission that officers had subjected him to "serious, gratuitous and prolonged" attack.
The court was told that Babar Ahmad, who is accused of raising funds for terrorism, had been punched, kicked and throttled during his arrest by officers from the force's territorial support group in December 2003.
The Met had repeatedly denied the claims, saying officers had used reasonable force during the arrest.
However, lawyers for the force's commissioner, Sir Paul Stephenson, today admitted at the high court that Ahmad had been the victim of gratuitous and sustained violence at his home in Tooting, south-west London.
"The commissioner has today admitted that his officers subjected Babar Ahmad to grave abuse tantamount to torture during his arrest," Ahmad's solicitor, Fiona Murphy, said outside the court.
During the hearing, it emerged that the Met had lost "a number of large mail sacks" containing details of other similar allegations against the officers who assaulted Ahmad.
Murphy said the few documents that had not been mislaid should have triggered a thorough investigation.
"The horrifying nature and volume of complaints against these officers should have provoked an effective response from the Metropolitan police and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) long ago," she said.
"Instead, it has fallen to Babar Ahmad to bring these proceedings to achieve public recognition of the wrong that was done to him."
She said other crucial documents relating to the case were also lost.
They included all the officers' contemporaneous notebooks and the taped recording of an interview with the senior officer in the case.
Murphy added: "The papers will be referred to the director of public prosecutions for urgent consideration of criminal charges against the officers concerned and for an investigation as to whether events surrounding the mislaid mail sacks constitute evidence of a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice."
During his arrest, Ahmad was punched, kicked and throttled, the court heard.
Officers stamped on the 34-year-old's feet and repeatedly punched him in the head before he was forced into the Muslim prayer position and they shouted: "Where is your God now? Pray to him."
After a sustained attack, he was forced into the back of a police van, where he was again beaten and punched before being put in a "life-threatening" neck hold and told: "You will remember this day for the rest of your life."
At one stage, one of the officers grabbed his testicles and he was also deliberately wrenched by his handcuffs – a technique known to cause intense pain.
Outside the court, Ahmad's brother-in-law, Fahad Ahmad, read out a statement on his behalf in which he said he was pleased the police had finally admitted what had happened.
"This abuse took place not in Guantánamo Bay or a secret torture chamber but in Tooting, south London," the statement said.
"The path to justice is long and difficult but, as long as you remain steadfast upon it, you will get there in the end."
Ahmad has been in detention since he was rearrested in 2004 after a request from the US government over claims he helped raise money to fund terrorist campaigns.
The court heard that no evidence had been produced against Ahmad, and he had never been charged with any offence.
He is now fighting extradition to the US in the European courts.
An IPCC investigation in 2007 ended with no action being taken against any officer.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)