After an open mic event on The Level where several protestors spoke out against EDO MBM as well as the draconian Harassment Act interim Injunction brought by the company against peaceful protestors outside their factory, and Sussex Police’s brutality trying to enforce it, the march began.

Arranged on a weekend so that more people could attend, it claimed the streets of Brighton for several hours. The police had said in the previous day’s local press, that they would come out in force to control the demonstrators and make sure they only went where the police wanted them to go.

Despite large numbers of demonstrators from a broad range of social and political groups, the police mobilised twice as many police as demonstrators to suppress the march and try to contain it and provoke it as much as possible. Luckily there were no arrests.

An early battle of determination was won by the marchers as a police line blockaded entry to bridge under the main rail station on Trafalgur Street, and tried to direct the march down a small side road in another direction. But this was not to be. Acting as a group the entire march made a decision to demand entry under the tunnel with chants of ‘Let us Through!’ and ‘Whose streets? Our Streets!’. After a recognition by police that marchers would move till they went the way they wanted, the police gave in and the march moved noisily into the tunnel and up to Queens Road.

Crowd solidarity was good. The police were often aggressive and legal observers noted individual officers numbers who were spoiling for a fight (for future information). Targeting of individual protestors by police snatch squads, (or in one case, by an abusive senior copper), also worked against them, as the march stopped and would not move till all in trouble were out of danger.

The march was then again contained and cordoned off at a junction just beyond the station. Police tactics of stopping and sealing off the crowd for an extended period worked against them here too, as this only created more of a spectacle for passers by to take an interest in and acquire leaflets about EDO MBM and War Crimes.

At one stage police were actively trying to prevent marchers from handing members of the public these leaflets, but this only made the public want them even more. The tactic of detention and enforced boredom was not effective on a warm summer day. It made the suppressive intentions of the coppers even more clear to demonstrators, and thus strengthened their collective determination to continue to march.

The main aim of the police was to stop the march reaching the main shopping area around Churchill Square and this they did at the last possible opportunity, but the third and final stand off along Queens Road gave everyone a chance to learn the location of First People Recruitment Ltd, a dodgy employment agency known to supply staff to EDO MBM under false pretences that the company are making civilian use technology. Here a specific leaflet expressing concerns about First People ltd was ceremoniously delivered to the office.

The march then turned into the busy North Street where it was watched by hundreds of shoppers, and then headed at a snail's pace, thanks to police slow motion penning in tactics (which failed to pen everyone in), back across town to the John Street Police Station. This was the intentional destination of the march since the declared purpose was to report evidence of EDO’s complicity in War Crimes and demand a police investigation. Previous approaches to individual coppers had met with contempt.

Outside the station, penned in by what seemed like a sea of yellow jackets, and riot vans, a senior officer was asked for by the protestors to receive the information. In the meantime the crowd heard from one protestor, who had just then entered into a debate with a cop in the cordon. This officer had just remarked to him that, ‘cluster bombs were better than other bombs because they were more effective’. The directed attentions of the crowd to this policeman’s remarkable support for cluster bombs, was too much for him, and he turned and scuttled away to hide in the police station just behind him, followed by jeers of derision.

At last a senior officer appeared, and who was it but our old friend Superintendent Kevin Moore, commentator for The Argus who had only the previous day said therein ,’ We will not be investigating them [EDO MBM] for war crimes because that is nonsense."

Now facing the crowd, (and a BBC camera crew) he had to swallow his words and agree in a mealy mouthed way to ‘consider’ the documents he was handed, (cue more jeering from the protestors for this mealymouthedness.) He offered an unsigned receipt as proof of acceptance but refused to give a crime or incident number tll he had read the papers. He said on tape that the footage from the various cameras present, could be used as proof of acceptance of the documents. He also had to admit that he had never read the ICC Act. This may prove to be an obstacle if he is trying to identify crimes which EDO are involved in.

Protestors intend in to follow up the Superintendent’s public statement to consider the evidence against EDO MBM, and provide more details as required.

. Noise Demos continue every Wednesday 4-6pm outside EDO MBM, Home Farm Road, Moulsecoomb, Brighton. Check the Smash EDO website for more details.www.smashedo.org.uk

. EDO MBM are to exhibiting at the 46th International Paris Air Show this week 13-19th June.

. A date for the full trial over EDO’s claim for a permanent High Court Civil Injunction Order against all protestors outside the Brighton factory, is expected to be announced by the end of June. Till then the interim injunction remains in place against all demonstrators who might wish to protest ouside the factory.

Legal Note for Sussex Police

ICC Act 2001.

Section 51.(1) It is an offence against the law of England and Wales for a person to commit genocide, a crime against humanity or a war crime.

Section 55.(1) Meaning of "ancillary offence"(a) aiding, abetting, counseling or procuring the commission of an offence. (d) assisting an offender.

In 55 subsection (1)(a) the reference to aiding, abetting, counselling or procuring is to conduct that in relation to an indictable offence would be punishable under section 8 of the Accessories and Abettors Act 1861 (c. 94).

In 55 subsection (1)(d) the reference to assisting an offender is to conduct that in relation to an arrestable offence would amount to an offence under section 4(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967 (c. 58).

The campaign to shut down Brighton’s very own bomb factory stepped up a gear in response to last weeks escalation of violence by the police. Local arms dealers EDO/MBM manufacture bomb release mechanisms and equipment for the Paveway series of weapons used in the illegal invasion of Iraq and aggression in places like Palestine, Afghanistan, Indonesia and Sri Lanka. Their Managing Director David Jones was quoted in the local press as being 'very proud' of UK involvement in Iraq.

For the last year EDO have been targeted by local activists in a sustained campaign in response to the use of EDO's weapons technology in the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. Weekly demonstrations outside the factory have been coupled with rooftop demos and road blockades, that have brought the factory to a standstill.

The success of the campaign was made clear when EDO (acting on the advice of Inspector Kerry Cox of Sussex Police) spent nearly fifty grand on a High Court Injunction, like those used against SHAC and SPEAC in an attempt to create an “exclusion zone” around their factory. The injunction under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 (the 'Stalkers law') was clearly intended to bring protests outside the factory gates to a close. Anybody protesting outside the factory would be deemed a “stalker” and subject to arrest. Ironically the court case created a lot of negative publicity for EDO and served only to boost the campaign. Suddenly EDO’s business and attempt to muzzle free speech became national news (1)

As word got out major demos outside the factory began to attract larger numbers of people. The most recent saw over seventy protestors on a week day! Meanwhile in court Judge Gross declared that “The right to freedom of speech is jealously guarded in English Law” and threw out most of EDO’s proposed restrictions in his interim injunction. No restrictions were placed on timing, size or noise of demonstrations.

However Sussex Police seem determined to protect the arms dealers. A demonstration dubbed “The Big One” on 31st of May, had over seventy officers in attendance . Police attempted to bully and intimidate the crowd of protestors which included a number of children. Confrontation was sparked when an eighty four year old man was pushed onto a narrow grass verge bordering a thirty foot drop onto a railway before being dragged to the floor and arrested. Despite good solidarity work within the crowd, seven further arrests were made. Those arrested face charges ranging from “obstructing the highway” to “assault police”. The reason given for such an overwhelming police response was the need to enforce the injunction. However nobody was charged with breaching the injunction.

Andrew Beckett, press spokesman for the campaign said “Last week’s aggressive police action was a clear attempt to frighten us out of our right to protest outside EDO’s factory. They say they’re enforcing the law but the fact that no-one was charged with breaching the injunction suggests that it is just a flimsy legal pretext for repression . They acted in a deliberately dangerous and provocative manner. Despite this we will not be silenced. We’re calling on everyone who’s against the arms trade and for the rights of free speech and assembly to join us and show their support on June 11th . We’ll be here until EDO isn’t”

DEFY THE INJUNCTION-DISARM THE BOMB MAKERS SATURDAY JUNE 11TH 12PM ON THE LEVEL, BRIGHTON. Noise Demos every Wednesday 4 ‘til 6

Background Info Brighton&Hove is a UN Peace Messenger City. The injunction referred to was served under the1997 Protection from Harassment Act (originally designed to protect women from stalkers) and is the first of its kind directed at activists outside of the animal rights movement. Crucially it is a civil injunction which carries criminal penalties.

Initially EDO/MBM requested a large “exclusion zone” comprising the whole of Home Farm Industrial Estate. They and Sussex police also wanted to limit demonstrations to two and a half hours, with less than ten people who had to be silent. Judge Gross refused to impose these conditions at the initial hearing. In his summing up he said, “The right to freedom of _expression is jealously guarded in English law” and consequently refused to impose the requested limits on size, timing or noise made at demonstrations.

EDO MBM Technologies Ltd are the sole UK subsidiary of huge U.S arms conglomerate EDO Corp, which was recently named No. 10 in the Forbes list of 100 fastest growing companies. They supply bomb release mechanisms to the US and UK armed forces amongst others. They supply crucial components for Raytheon’s Paveway IV guided bomb system, widely used in the “Shock and Awe” campaign in Iraq. EDO also recently withdrew a threatened libel action against Indymedia over being named as “warmongers”.

Lawson-Cruttenden & Co, a solicitors firm working for EDO have been instrumental in developing the Protection of Harassment Act 1997 from a measure designed to safeguard individuals to a corporate charter to make inconvenient protest illegal. They have pioneered to use of injunctions to create large “exclusion zones”. They have secured numerous injunctions against anti-vivisection and anti-GM protestors.

Campaign against EDO MBM, People involved in the anti-EDO campaign include, but are not limited to: local residents, the Brighton Quakers, peace activists, anti-capitalists, Palestine Solidarity groups, human rights groups, trade unionists, academics and students. The campaign started in August 2004 with a peace camp. It’s avowed aim is to expose EDO MBM and their complicity in war crimes and to remove them from Brighton.