Today (Wednesday 11th), in the High Court in London, Bayer AG (the German pharmacuetical and chemicals giant) sought to make permanent an interim court order against six named individuals and five 'organisations' which effectively turns previously lawful protest activities into a criminal offence.
The judge gave his ruling on Friday 13th, upholding all of the conditions previously requested. Defendants have 28 days to make a case against the ruling,until then, the interim court order obtained in December will remain effective.
Lawyers outlaw protest where UK governments fail
Using the Protection from Harassment Act, the injunction places severe restrictions on the freedom of expression and ability to protest, for anyone that could be shown to be working in concert with the named organisations (which include two websites!).
Obviously this has far reaching implications for everyone. The simply act of reporting on events relating to the campaign against Bayer, or walking or parking in some streets in Oxford and Cambridge, could become a criminal offence for anyone that might be shown to have knowledge of the injuntion and be connected in some way to one of the named injunctees (perhaps having visited the StopBayerGM website).
Previous report | Court order on bayer's site | Schnews on Injunction | www.stopbayergm.org
More on this from the Indymedia topics Bio-technology page.
Global news on the bio-tech threat from the Bio-Tech IMC www.biotechimc.org
Bayer became one focus for the genetix campaign when it aquired Aventis Cropsciene a couple of years ago. Now called Bayer Cropscience, the company owns all the GM varieties likely to be planted first, should commercial growing be approved with in next couple of years.
Being the company initially expected to profit most from commercialisation, Bayer has become the target of a UK wide campaign intending to put pressure on all it's business interests.
In responce to the resulting actions (over 40 so far reported, averaging over one per week), Bayer sought court protection to stifel dissent. It seems unlikely that Bayer's attempts will work. There are plenty of examples where similar attempts have backfired on the corporations involved (for example the classic example of McLibel). Indeed, outrage caused by attacks on freespeech often involvs more people in campaigns and injects new energy and tactics.
Court orders used against Animal Rights protesters have simply resulted in great numbers of covert actions which, in the face of an injunction, become lower risk activities than standing around in public with leafets and banners.
Some observers have commented that there are strong indications that the biotech industries PR machine is hopping to discredit the anti-GM movement which has enjoyed massive public support and sympathy from much of the mainstream and even in the courts.
Whether Bayer succeeds in thrawting the campaign against it, or whether the biotech industry manage to alienate the anti-GM movement - there is another, perhaps more significant part to the story.
This injunction is just part trend and perhaps simply the tip of a fast approaching iceburg. The accelerating pace of the criminalisation of dissent is clearly noticable to those working on many different fronts. Be it through injuntions, or the use of police powers under the terrorist act or the public order act, protest appears to be increasingly risky as our rights are attacked from all sides.