R5 A3: Speak Up, Speak Out: Protecting the Right to Protest

Speak Up, Speak Out: Protecting the Right to Protest

More and more people are joining in climate activism, voicing their concerns on
the streets of Europe and beyond. While these protests are peaceful, police
forces are used as if the protesters were violent (eg. the violent repercussions
against students in Turin’s Piazza Arbarello student protest in 2022, or the
recent blockades of the A12 motorway in The Hague - reference here). Increasing
militarisation is happening in many ways, including the deployment of armed
military forces to suppress protests and supplying police with equipment like
armoured vehicles, military-grade aircraft, surveillance drones, guns and
assault weapons, stun grenades and sound cannons. Military forces are organised,
trained and equipped for war and defence and have no place at a protest, where
police should be trained in de-escalation, mediation and keeping people safe.
Governments try to justify this disproportionate escalation in the use of force
by painting protesters as a threat to public safety, but in truth, these tactics
are ultimately a way to intimidate people into silence. Police and other state
authorities often use facial recognition software and CCTV and IMSI tracking
technologies to track phones. The use of mass surveillance tactics like this not
only invades protesters’ right to privacy but also intimidates people so that
they are less likely to want to attend protests in the first place.

We argue that “everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to
freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join
trade unions for the protection of his interests [,]” as stated by the European
Convention on Human Rights (Article 11 – Freedom of assembly and association -
reference here). “No restrictions shall be placed on the exercise of these
rights other than such as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of national security or public safety, for
the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals or
for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others” (reference here).

Having considered the facts laid out in this resolution, we, the Federation of
Young European Greens calls upon the European Union and its Member States to:

• Implement stricter regulation of the escalation of the use of violence
  when intervening, and list robust repercussions when the escalation
  exceeds legislative standards.

• Create a public system of proportionate policing which utilises the
  classification of the types of protests and a democratic decision on what
  is needed to keep protests within legal and civil bounds, to ensure
  safety.

• Improve the training of police forces to limit the number of unnecessarily
  violent interventions of protest and ensure the authorities are trained to
  use the least intrusive means and respond in proportion to the offence
  (reference here).

• Campaign for a ban on the production and distribution of abusive tools of
  torture, such as contact electric shock devices and spiked batons. These
  tools serve only the purpose of inflicting pain. Usage of these tools,
  especially in the setting of peaceful protests, is harmful and even
  unlawful under the UN Convention against Torture (reference here).

• Alter national considerations of public demonstrations as a threat to
  public order or national security. Shift focus of police presence from
  intimidating and controlling protesters to prioritising the protection of
  protesters.

• Campaign for stricter regulations on the distribution and use of weaponry
  by authorities, following the limits already imposed by the European
  Convention on Human Rights, and ensure the articles of the latter are
  strictly maintained during demonstrations (reference here). In the
  instances in which police officers may be required to use force, eg.
  during the arrest of a violent person or to protect themselves or others,
  it is crucial that any use of force is limited to the minimum. It should
  also be applied lawfully and be accounted for by, for example, monitoring
  safe policing through agents’ bodycams (Ibid.).

• Ban arbitral detention and sentencing of demonstrators, such as, but not
  limited to, in instances where elements of disruption (eg. blocking
  traffic or noise) are criminalised and stigmatised as serious offences, or
  even used as accusations of “terrorism” (in 2017, the UK government
  imposed charges based on counterterrorism legislation against protestors
  that had blocked Stansted Airport during a non-violent act of
  disobedience) (reference here).