First they came for the animal rights activists… May 27, 2008
Posted by JennieB in Activism, Corporate Structures, News.trackback
Stop Sequani Animal Testing campaign has been targeted with people arrested and one facing serious charges.
In 2006, activists had their homes raided under the National Extremist Tactical Coordination Unit’s (NETCU) Operation Tornado with doors broken off hinges. Six were charged with breach of section 145 Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (SOCPA – see below).
Although the charges were dropped for most of the Sequani Six. Sean Kirtley, one of the six is currently on remand charged with ‘conspiracy to interfere with contractual relationships so as to harm an animal research organisation and is currently in prison’. He will be sentenced on Friday 30th May. If found guilty, Sean faces up to at least five years in prison.
What’s section 145 of SOCPA 2005 about then?
s. 145: Interference with contractual relationships so as to harm animal research organisation.
It is a breach of this section to either commit an offence OR to even commit a civil wrong (eg trespass as opposed to aggravated trespass) with the intention of getting A to terminate, or not to enter into, a
contractual relationship with B. Breaching this is punishable by a prison sentence of up to 5 years and fine.
For example, you’ve committed the civil wrong of nuisance by carrying out noise demonstrations outside Arrowmight Biosciences to try and get them to stop supplying Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS) with cages. Normally they might sue you or get an injunction. Now, thanks to SOCPA s.145, they can prosecute, send you down for up to five years AND fine you.
Lessons for the 51st State
The above principle has been nicked from the United States, where activists from the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty USA Campaign (SHAC 7) have been sent down for between 1 and 6 years for breaching the Animal Enterprise Protection Act.
According to the SHAC 7 website, “They are not accused of actually smashing windows, liberating animals or even attending demonstrations, rather reporting on and encouraging others to engage in legal demonstrations and supporting the ideology of direct action.”
Implications for all activists and activist research
A guilty verdict for Sean may set yet another precedent for all activists. For example, the offence of ‘aggravated trespass’, – now used on peace activists and environmentalists for doing anything from blockading power stations, occupying offices, or pulling up GM crops – originally came from the animal rights movement. This law was made to criminalise hunt saboteurs in the mid-nineties.
If charged, the precedent may well be set where any organisation, or individual, reporting on animal abuse at the hands of companies could face accusations of breaching s. 145 SOCPA 2005 (trying to influence contractual relationships). The important thing here is that, at present, animal rights activists are specifically targeted by s.145. Therefore, at present, the legislation is highly discriminatory.
As stated in copious reports from alternative media sources (this case has not caught the attention of the national mainstream media), Sean isn’t accused of actually undertaking any direct action. He’s being accused of being a ‘hub’ for demonstrations and, as he moderated the Stop Sequani website, ‘an organiser’.
For more information on the campaign, see the Stop Sequani Animal Testing Site. For more details on NETCU, see NETCU Watch. To support Sean, check out the following links:
More reports on Sequani and Sean Kirtley from:
[...] on Sequani case. June 2, 2008 Posted by JennieB in News. trackback We reported a few days ago on the case of the Stop Sequani Campaign. Here’s what [...]