Peter Atack

Introduction

In my naivete, I spent early November trying to create a peaceful space within in which I could protest the actions of the G-20, the IMF and World Bank. I am a Quaker, a religious pacifist who "utterly denies the use of all outward arms for the Kingdoms of God or the Kingdoms of Man". Because of my religious beliefs, and because of my conviction that the political use of violence is counterproductive, I cannot even passively support with my presence the use of violence at a demonstration. Therefore, I wanted to create a peaceful space where all could participate using our democratic rights to free assembly and free speech to reject and denounce the tribute gathering of the IMF and World Bank. My concern was with the behaviour of the "Black Block". Events proved that I should have been more concerned about the violence of the police.

What Happened

The Spokescouncil agreed that the major march and rally on Saturday would be peaceful, and that for the duration of the march no one would engage in verbal or physical confrontations with the police, nor would there be any direct actions against property. This would allow all activists, from grandmothers to children to participate together in a shared "family fun" protest.

To support the "Family Fun" March, I was selected with others to act as a police liaison, to make arrangements about the march and the march only. At first we were given the run around by the police forces, as we were referred from one officer, and office to another, for over a week. In the intervening week, the Spokescouncil had lost consensus over speaking to the police. For anarchists and communists feel that on principle, one never speaks to the police since all they do is use you and turn you into a collaborator. At the time I dismissed their concerns as youthful, self dramatizing paranoia. They were right, I was wrong, for it is not paranoia when the police really are out to get you. However, we were still allowed to liaise with the police on behalf of GDO, and if we wanted to, sign a protest permit for the March. In the end, we did not simply because the process for getting a permit is too long for the short time frame we had.

When the police finally deigned to meet with us (the week of the protests), we informed them of the route and the beginnings and end point at the Supreme Court. We were informed that the Police would not interfere with the March. We asked for, and received assurances that the police would keep a minimal presence for the March in the form of bicycle cops, to keep the peace and reduce tensions.

Instead of bike cops we were ambushed by a phalanx of fully armoured riot cops with police dogs. This was not an on the spur of the moment deployment, for the police waited on buses on Le Breton Flats during our rally, then deployed across our route in a gauntlet at Wellington and Booth, carefully far away from the television cameras that had been covering the rally. As the Den Mother (or chief Marshall) for the end of the march I was responsible for the safety of participants. The police, with no provocation, attempted to split the march to round up anyone for the crime of wearing black. The police used the New York shuffle (moving in lock step pounding on their shields while chanting move, move) to push everyone over, for no apparent reason but to prove they could. I had to pull people away from yelling at the police, for their own safety. I was forced to abandon one citizen who had been bitten by a police dog, with the street medics. At the top of the hill on Laurier, our march was interdicted again by the police, and I shamelessly turned a United Church banner around to face the police to protect us from a police charge, even though I knew it wouldn t help. The police deployed on the northern side of Laurier with police dogs, with their backs against a chain link fence. I guess the police had to protect the park. I saw one protestor brought down by a police dog with no provocation on his part. One protestor who was yelling at the police had a gun pointed at point-blank range at his face and was told to move. I intervened between gun and face to pull the citizen away saying "these idiots aren t worth dying for".

Trust and Truth: Police Liaison Officers

The actions of the police on November 17th fatally compromised the trust of the community in police liaison officers. Instead of building trust with an activist community that was already leery of communicating with the police, the liaison officers were used to pump activists for information to plot an ambush. This breach of trust should be of concern to the Panel, for in an emergency, protest organisers have to trust that the liaison officers are telling them the truth. For example, if the police ask us to reroute the march because of a normal emergency, (fire or even a bomb threat or medical emergency) we have to trust that the police are telling us the truth. Just as importantly, Guides have to be trusted by a diverse group of protestors, that they know the truth. Ask yourselves, why would any protest organisers ever agree to meet with any police again, since we were only used to get information to attack us?

However, despite what happened, I do not personally believe that liaison officers were misleading us on purpose. Based on private conversations afterwards, I believe that liaison officers were not privy to command decisions, and for example, they were unaware that the Laurier street bridge was being blockaded. As well, the media spokespersons were also unaware that police dogs were being used to attack protestors, because what they said to the media was based on what they d read in the policy manuals of the police.

But at no point were there identifiable command officers who were in charge of the police to communicate with during the march. There was noone in charge on the street that march leaders could communicate with to attempt to defuse tense situations. Instead they arrested one of our MC s who did try to defuse a tense situation. Indeed, no officers were identifiable to the public by name, and some had removed even their personal identification numbers. The importance of police officers being identifiable, cannot be minimized, for anonymity leads to impunity, and feelings of invulnerability as police violence escalates and otherwise good police officers may mislay their consciences in the heat of the moment with lethal results.

The cult of secrecy pervades our police services. The name of the officer in charge was kept secret, until released by accident. The command structure of the police services was a mystery to the public during this weekend, and who was in charge of the four police services, much less which police force was responsible for what acts was never made public. Mystery and silence allowed the police forces to evade responsibility for their actions. The cult of secrecy has led our Chief Bevan to announce that their internal review has led to thirty recommendations for changes to their policies, but the Privacy Act demands that some of these changes not be made public. Whether or not this means that policy will be changed to prevent this kind of police misbehaviour, or whether this means that policy will be changed ex post facto to legalize these actions, only the police chief will know.

Democracy and Protest

We had our rights to freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, freedom of the press, violated in Ottawa that November weekend. We were subjected to illegal searches, our vigil on Friday was surrounded and attacked, members of the media were assaulted for being reporters and the police presence was designed to intimidate and silence dissent not keep the peace.

Yet protest matters in a democracy. The German philosopher Jurgen Habermas has described protest as the early warning signal to political leaders that new issues have arisen that must be addressed. I would argue that protest is even more fundamental to a healthy democracy, for they are the means by which average citizens can make fellow citizens aware of shared concerns. Protest allows citizens to set the political agenda, to actually have a say in how we as citizens are governed, and how our government will shape our lives. Protest is the means by which minority voices speak to the majority, change the conscience of the nation, and change the world.

For without protest and dissent, there would still be slavery, women would be the chattel of their husbands, noone here would have the vote and the Berlin Wall would still stand. Protest has brought an end to slavery and segregation, made us aware of threats to our environment, freed workers from poverty and created a labour movement.

I was angry, too angry when I first began speaking out against the police actions of November 16-18th. I was angry because my faith in the Canadian police was shattered. As a political scientist, I ve studied police violations of human rights around the world. In my innocence I thought we knew better in Canada than to attack protestors, that we understood protest was part of our civic duty. Never in Canada did I expect to see the police level weapons at citizens, sic dogs on us. I never expected the police to use my attempts to defuse tension to better plan police repression. I never thought I d see Canadian police attack Canadians.

But now that I have, my anger has given way to determination that this will not be allowed to pass. This panel must make clear that the tactics and strategies of the police services on November16-18th were unacceptable. The tactic of committing mass illegal searches to intimidate protestors must be condemned. The tactic of deploying police dogs to attack peaceful protestors must be abolished in keeping with already existing police policies. The tactic of using concussion or "crowd buster" grenades to scatter a crowd gathered for a peace and Muslim prayer vigil must be recognized as an assault on religious freedom and toleration. The abuse of the rights of those arrested to counsel of their choice must never happen again.

The police strategy of silencing dissent through intimidation and coercion must not be allowed to pass in silence in my Canada, in my capital. This was not what democracy looks like. I have not been silent, and I m counting on this panel to not let the police abolish freedom.