Tom Kertes

Coverage on the G20 summit from the Guardian:

The high level of militarisation that has been witnessed over the past couple of days has also been a major talking point, as Canadians are not accustomed to seeing such weaponry being so openly paraded at civil demonstrations. One small protest against poverty and homelessness in Toronto itself was quickly surrounded by vast numbers of police in full riot gear, including mounted police. More chilling still was the visible presence of heavily armed officers touting tear gas rifles and other firearms; police have also confirmed firing plastic bullets and pepper spray capsules at demonstrators on Saturday night. read more

Source: Globe and Mail

From the Globe and Mail:

My city feels like a crime scene and the criminals are all melting into the night, fleeing the scene. No, I’m not talking about the kids in black who smashed windows and burned cop cars on Saturday.I’m talking about the heads of state who, on Sunday night, smashed social safety nets and burned good jobs in the middle of a recession. Faced with the effects of a crisis created by the world’s wealthiest and most privileged strata, they decided to stick the poorest and most vulnerable people in their countries with the bill.

How else can we interpret the G20’s final communiqué, which includes not even a measly tax on banks or financial transactions, yet instructs governments to slash their deficits in half by 2013. This is a huge and shocking cut, and we should be very clear who will pay the price: students who will see their public educations further deteriorate as their fees go up; pensioners who will lose hard-earned benefits; public-sector workers whose jobs will be eliminated. And the list goes on. These types of cuts have already begun in many G20 countries including Canada, and they are about to get a lot worse. read more

Click photo for high res version.

Image source: jonasnaimark.com

Image source: we move to canada [Laura Kaminker]

The entire approach to the G20 summit was a mess.  The results were predictable.  No matter the specifics or the degree of intent by all sides, it is clearly not an effective strategy to ignore people who are rioting and looting while pushing people who are protesting peacefully into a corner.

The government clearly has the means (it spent more than a billion on safety) to do its job and therefore should of been able to conduct its summit in an orderly and transparent way.  But by focusing on a security fence and not the safety of nearby neighbours, and by building up a tense and anti-democratic tone, the government failed in carrying out its most sacred duty – which is to protect rights and advance democratic values. If the billion spent on safety was to protect the safety of people protesting the government and the neighbours near the summit, while also respecting and advancing the right to free expression, then perhaps such a high price tag could be worth it. But instead the government wasted our money by failing to do any of this, raising concerns about why the police did not intervene as vandalism took place.

My friend writes in her [the] blog we move to canada about these concerns:

Today, there are numerous reports — from both national media and private citizens — of heavily-armed police at the G20 protests yesterday simply standing around or actually AWOL when some of the most extreme violence was occurring. It makes one highly suspicious that the vandalism may have been allowed to occur to justify the spending of at least $1,300,000,000 of taxpayer money on “security”. read more

She [He] continues by citing a number of traditional media sources:

The Toronto Star reported that “about 70 black-clad protesters ran amok through mostly deserted streets … At police headquarters, about 50 officers in full riot gear stood guard, but they didn’t move against the protesters even after they smashed the windows of the police museum.”

Marcus Gee, columnist for the Globe & Mail, reported that the police kept their distance as a few dozen people “roamed through the business district, then up Yonge and along College, smashing all the way. … There was not a cop in sight as the crowd went on its rampage on Yonge.”

Gee lamented that the peaceful protest was overshadowed by “a small group of perhaps 100 or 200 hard-core militants … with destruction on their minds”, yet he devoted most of his column to their antics. It’s irresistible, I guess. The Star’s photo section is dominated by action shots of rioters. read more

The National Post reports on the conditions in the detention centre for the G20 summit.  Given that most people arrested were either protesting peacefully or in the wrong place at the wrong time, and not looting or rioting, these conditions are even more unacceptable than if for people who had been properly accused for a violation of the law.

Arrest and detention for being at a protest, prior to a conviction, is not meant to be a punishment – but should be part of a process based in principles of justice.  The government is responsible for conducting its business (on our behalf) in ways that are fair and that advance democratic values.  When people are protesting against government policy, the government should go out of its way to ensure that safety measures do not dissuade free expression. An easy way to do this is to treat all those arrested at a protest with the utmost respect, not only because it’s likely that most who are arrested in this situation did not violate any law, but also because we’re all innocent until proven otherwise.

Again, this is unacceptable:

We weren’t just handcuffed. They also put cuffs on our legs, around the ankles. Once we got to Eastern Avenue (the site of the temporary detention centre) we were put into makeshift cages. They were about six metres by four metres in size. For a while, they kept moving us from cage to cage, as we were being processed and the charges were explained to everyone.

We were strip searched. It is all kind of blurry. Once we got to speak on the phone to a lawyer, we had some idea of what was happening and knew that we might get out on bail the next day. We did not get any water for 12 hours.

We could not wear our shoes in the cell. It was so cold. It felt like it was five degrees and we were in our t-shirts. There were no blankets. There was just a narrow steel bench and a port-a-potty with an open door. Some people huddled inside the port-a-potty to keep warm. All we had were a couple cheese sandwiches. It was a slice of cheese inside a bun. People were yelling all night, asking for some water.

The lights were always on, it was impossible to sleep. There seemed to be a constant influx of protesters being bought in. We were brought to the courthouse in the morning. We had to wait in the cells downstairs for a few more hours. I haven’t  slept at all. read more

I came from the United States to Canada in large part because my government used its powers to dissuade protest and dissent. This abuse of power fueled secret torture networks around the world, illegal mass arrests based on one’s religion or race, wars of aggression sold on absolute falsehoods, and an erosion of institutions essential for a democracy – like schools, independent judges and a robust media.

I left the US sad because I believe in democracy and think it’s worth advancing.  I left afraid for my home country, and hopeful that Canada represented a place with a stronger democracy.  My hope was to learn from Canada and to share what I learned with other Americans, to learn how to advance and expand democratic principles for the common good. I came knowing how valuable a functioning democracy really is, especially one that respects human rights and advances the common good.

The rioting yesterday does not justify the conduct of the government today. Arresting people who rioted (or otherwise broke the law) is not the same thing as shutting down all protest today. Restoring order is the not the same as advancing justice, especially since Toronto was not facing disorder (protesters were orderly and peaceful today). That the government failed to respond to a hundred or so rioters yesterday, and then to take this out on peaceful protesters today, is simply unacceptable. Given that the government has the resources (more than a billion in funding) to manage the situation effectively, without stamping out all dissent and protest, its conduct is shocking and should be challenged. With a billion dollars, the government has the means to plan and prepare to handle disruptions, according to the law and with respect to the rights of Canadians.

Given that it is the government’s job is to safely manage events like the G20 summit, in an orderly and transparent way that respects human rights and advances democratic values, there is no excuse for what is coming out of Toronto today.  We should advance our rights, we should protect and expand our democracy, and we should stand up for justice – lest we lose what makes Canada safe for democracy.

The photo above was taken earlier today in Toronto.  The picture speaks for itself.

Government not only is responsible for conducting its meetings, like the G20 summit, in orderly and transparent ways, but is also obligated to respect the rights of people.  The human right to freedom of expression is not only a personal right, but is also a cornerstone of our democratic way of life.  Governments should support expression, not merely respect or not abridge it.  Facilitating free expression should be positive part of what a government does, including in how the police are deployed to support free expression.

When the government fails to positively advance freedom of expression, or (worse) when it acts in ways that restrict expression, we weaken our democracy. This is totally unacceptable and we should work hard to keep our democratic liberties and to keep a diverse and vibrant civil society in full force. The alternative to respect for freedom of expression and peaceful assembly does not reflect Canadian values and result in great social costs to the society and culture at large.  The failure by government to effectively respond to rioters yesterday does not justify an unreasonable police clamp down on unrelated protests today.

The video above tells part of the story of the G20 protests in Toronto – a very different story from that of a story centred on rioters in city neighbourhoods breaking windows and burning cars.  The story of the riot is frightening and was meant to be disruptive and divisive. The riot itself sends a message of disregard for civil society.  The story of the larger march, held in protest of the economic and social agenda behind the G20 summit, tells a story of peaceful protest, civic engagement and unity of people for the purpose of strengthening our democracy.  These two stories deserve our attention as we sort out a better way to hold and respond to summits such as the G20.

But there is a third story as well, and that is the story of how the government failed to meet its responsibilities to hold an orderly and transparent meeting in the conduct of its business. The structure of the summit, and the message this structure delivers, violates the spirit of democracy.  It is the job of a democratic government to hold its business, the people’s business, in orderly and transparent forums that involve all voices in the deliberations of civil society. Toronto’s G20 summit is a failure of the government to perform this job as we should expect, and the results are division and disruption, fear and the discrediting of democracy itself.  This marks a huge blundering by the government. Citizens should be outraged and demand a better approach in the future.

By virtue of the power granted to government, it is the obligation of government to conduct its business in a way that respects the basis of this power.  Chaos and disorder has no place in democratic deliberation, and it is the responsibility of government to organize itself in ways that ensure both order and transparency.  We build Parliament buildings and city halls to facilitate this function of government. This is also why we televise committee meetings and government deliberations and is why we build spaces for community events of all manner. Parks, libraries, plazas and boulevards are essential components of a democracy.  So are protests and demonstrations, which should reflect a range of views and positions – not just the side of one faction or the government of the day.  These spaces and processes are the basis of government legitimacy, they are the means by which we work in co-operation and collaboration with each other.

The government failed to live up to its obligations in the recent conduct of the G20 summit.  The design, location, timing and tactics of the conference led to predictable results. Imagine if our city halls were surrounded by 10,000 militarized riot police and hidden behind a massive new fence every time city council met.  What tone would that set for openness in the conduct of city business? Imagine a sporting event or concert secured using riot police first, instead of friendly security and crowd management staff in the front lines.  Think of the tension this creates. Avoiding this tension is one reason why we don’t turn our concerts, sporting events and other cultural events into militarized and fenced off spaces.  But then imagine if a few drunken or otherwise disorderly people started to fight at a concert. Would the police start by aggressively pushing the non-rioting concert goers into corners, cordoning them into cages, while the rioters rampaged with impunity? Why would the government treat this community event, the gathering of the world’s leaders to decide how to structure our economies, in a less open and less welcoming way than it does other civic events?

The government already knows how to manage huge public events, and already knows who to respond to disruptions at these events. Riots occur at sporting events, but sporting events are still accommodated and the police don’t usually respond by making the next event feel like a prison or a war zone. The government also already knows how to conduct its business in an orderly and transparent way.  This is how almost all government business is conducted already – so why did the government fail to apply what it knows to the G20 summit?  With more than a billion dollars spent on safety, there is no excuse for the failure of the government to hold its summit in an orderly and transparent way.

The point of protest in democracy is keep conflict in the open, to provide a way for everyone to speak up and to have a voice.  There are few more important a jobs of government than to maintain the conditions for democracy, which makes the poor performance in conducting the G20 summit all the more troublesome.  A better approach to crowd management is needed. A better venue and more a transparent process is called for.  More, not less, accommodation of diversity of views and expression of dissent is called for.  Government alone has the resources and the obligation to ensure that its meetings are conducted in orderly and transparent ways, to make sure that its events don’t devolve into street fights and to make sure the rights of citizens to speak up are advanced as part of the sacred trust between the people and our government.

Here I am today at Vancouver Change Camp.  The photo is by Jean Djinni. More on my day at this excellent gathering.

More photos from the day at Flickr.