imminent rebellion 12

8/12/2019 imminent rebellion 12

1/71

AnarchismWith a mall a, the word anarhim implie a et of

aumption and priniple, a reurrent tendeny

or orientationwith the sre on movement in adirecion, not a perfeced onditiontoward more

dipered and le onentrated power; le top-down

hierarhy and more elf-determination through

bottom-up partiipation; liberty and equality een

a direcly rather than inverely proportional; the

nurturane of individuality and diverity within

a matrix of interonnecivity, mutuality, and

aountability; and an expanive reognition of

the variou form that power relation an take,and orrepondingly, the variou dimenion of

emanipation. Ti tendeny, when it beome

oniou, motivate people to oppoe or ubvert

the srucure that generate and usain inequity,

unfreedom, injusie, and to promote or prefigure the

srucure that generate and usain equity, freedom,

and jusie.

Maia Ramnath,Decolonizing Anarchism


2/71


3/71

imminentrebellion

Pirate v Pirate :Somalia through the eye of a

German ourt

Lizard Revenge

Loomio: Making elf-organiedgovernane onvenient

Te rial

Never Ceded: An interviewwith Marianne Makay

Hot and Hotter: Te SexWorker Freedom Fetival

Up a Mighty RiverWithout a Paddle

Unpiking Aradia: PhilipJoeph and early NZ anarhim

An Interview with the KurdihAnarhit Forum

Te Aftermath: Te fight toave Glen Inne

4

14

20

28

40

44

48

54

58

66

An irregular anarhit journal from deepin the South Paifi. A politic that refue to reduce thecomplexity of life to the ingular logic of the State cannot be

imple, it cannot be the domain of eay logan. Nor can ananarchist politicsever make the rik of believing it ha achieved

a finality, even if only theoretical. Ti journal i therefore not propaganda, but a genuine attempt

to articulate an anarchit practice and theory, one whoearticulation mut be without end.

TWELVE

hand bound with ahatredof the

State infused into every page

EditorsAli, Val, Hannah

DesignTorrance

Cover Image

Mengzhu Fu

PublisherRebel Press > PO Box 9263Marion Square > [email protected]

ContributionsContributions for issue 13 can besent to our email address. Weprefer articles to be kept below5,000 words. Deadline sometimemid 2014check our website forupdates.

ColophonFutura, Caslon80GSMfully recycled paper

ISSN1178-7740 (print)1178-7759 (pdf)

@nti-copyright 2013This journal and the contents withinmay not be reproduced for purposes

of profit.


4/71

4

PIRATES VSPIRATES

Somalia through the eyes of aGerman court

S have been on trialin Germany for the attempted

hijacking of a container hip in. Te trial sarted in

and dragged on for almos twoyearbut not becaue there waany doubt about what happened

on the hip.

Image: Nigel

Peppertree


5/71


6/71

6

Ti neo-colonial attitude of the court i a hallmark of the proceeding. Inorder to get a picture of the defendant ocial ituation in Somalia, onlyEuropean expert were heard, one of whom admitted not having been to So-

malia for year. Tat i undertandable, ince there i a civil war there. Tefact that thi in itelf mean that the court will never be in a poition to trulyacertain the ituation in Somalia, did not occur to the court. Te crew of thekidnapped hip aipanof the Dutch frigate rompwere heard, member ofthe German federal police were heard, but not a ingle witne from Somalia.

Te trial dragged on for nearly two year with the ten defendant wear-ing huge headphone to liten to imultaneou tranlation of the court pro-ceeding, given by three interpreter. Alo preent were about a dozen prioncrew and lawyer (every defendant had been aigned two lawyer in

order to be able to keep the trial going when one of them wa ick). Everytime one of the accued took hi headphone off, the judge topped the pro-ceeding until the headphone were back in place. Whether the defendantactually undertood anything that wa aid wa irrelevant, a long a theywere wearing their headphone.

Until April , all ten accued had been in cutody, depite numerouapplication by the defence to have them releaed on bail. Ten the threeyounget one were finally releaed into a youth facility, after another court

had ruled that they couldnt be held in cutody for more than two year. Nor-mally, teenager are not remanded in cutody for more than a few month inHamburg.

In Somalia, everything i different from the way it i in other countrie.

But the court want to ee our country through German eye.Statement by one of the accused after days in court

In February , the trial eemed to finally be coming to a cloe. Allthe witnee the judge had wanted to hear had been heard; ome of theaccued had made peronal tatement regarding their family ituation andpretty much all application by the defence had been declined. Te pro-ecutor had held her cloing addre and demanded harh prion entence,between four and a half year for the younget accued and year for the

I have been waiting for my verdict for thirteen month; Ive been veryill. I am a prioner of my illne. When I try to explain my ituation to my

family, they dont believe me. I have intructed my lawyer not to file any moreapplication. Tere mut be an end now. Enough i enough.

Accused after months of trial


7/71

7

oldet. Ti prompted one of the accued to breakhi ilence and make a two hour-long tatement tothe court, indicting everyone ele and exoneratinghimelf. He named two of hi co-accued a thealleged leader and told the court that everyone

except him had been carrying AK or RocketPropelled Grenade (RPG). He, on the otherhand, had only been hired to tranlate between theSomali and the crew and had only been carryingan unloaded pitol. He later corrected himelf andadmitted that the pitol wa loaded.

At that point everything wa opened up again,the judge pent everal day interrogating the ac-cued in order to get more indictment out of him.What he got wa more contradiction. Predictably,the other defendant then decided to dicredit thenew crown witne. Tey claimed that the oppo-ite wa true, that hi family had organied thewhole thing and that he had participated in otherattack on hip. Tere i an increaing amount of

evidence upporting that claim. A, often the caein thee ituation, the only winner i the proecu-

tion who tarted new invetigation againt boththe crown witne and againt the other.

By July , the trial till eemed to be goingnowhere. Te fact that after day and dozen ofwitnee, there were till urpriing turn in thi

trial wa in itelf an indictment of the trial. It wathe inevitable reult of the court neo-colonial at-titude. On the urface, the court had done every-thing that wa required under the German tat-ute. It looked at all the evidence, heard witneeand explored the ocial circumtance of the ac-cuedbut without ever undertanding anything.In a cene that wa typical for the trial, one of theaccued told the court of all the vegetable he hadeaten in prion in Germany for the firt time inhi life. Ti wa wiftly interrupted by the judgeaying that he wa not intereted in hearing theprion canteen menu.

One of the crucial element of etablihingguilt in the ene of Wetern law i the quetion

of whether the accued had participated out oftheir own free will in the hijacking. Mot of them


8/71

8

claimed that thi want the cae, the court di-agreedbut what doe the term free will meanin a country that i in a civil war, where peoplehave been robbed of their livelihood, and wheredrought regularly caue widepread famine? Tii a country where both the ranitional Federal

Government and the oppoition militia are buyrecruiting children a young a ten to become ol-dier.

in the Indian Ocean, involving people who hadnever experienced anything but civil war in theirlive. Te binary logic of right and wrong, whichthe European jutice ytem ue to divide it pop-ulation into guilty and innocent, fail even morepectacularly when it i applied to ocial circum-

tance that are o fundamentally different fromwhat mot German have experienced. It i noturpriing that thi approach failed. However, it ithe defendant who are uffering from thi failure.

One defendant decribed to the court howhe had ended up on the aipan: he had been a

fiherman, but when there wa no more fih to becaught, he tarted to get into debt. A hopkeeperallowed him and hi wife to buy food on credit,but eventually wanted the debt paid back. Whenhe couldnt, the hopkeeper kidnapped hi on a aecurity. Tat wa when he decided to take up anoffer to take part in a hijacking, being promied

exactly the , that he owed. He then pentnearly three year in prion in Germany, till un-able to pay hi debt and hi on till being held bythe hop owner. In December , upporter ofthe Somali publihed the tory in an illutratedbooklet and raied the fund for the releae of thechild. In January, the money wa tranferred toSomalia and the child releaed.

Te court in it arrogance, attempted to ap-ply German tandard to event that took place

We lived in a tin hut without water. Welept on cardboard. When my brotherhad no work, we would go hungry for

day. When I wa nine year old, mybrother took me to the harbour to work,

unloading container. When I had work, Icould afford two meal a day.

{And they have been uffering. Several of

them were on anti-depreant for month. Teyare worried about their familie, left in a war-torn country that ha alo been uffering from adrought. Tey feel helple, being locked up in

a prion cell, when they feel that they hould beupporting their familie. A one of them aid:My oul ha been detroyed. I have been takenhere, but I cannot be here any longer.

pirates andpiratesEver ince Somali dictator Siad Barre wa toppled

in , the country ha been in a civil war. Teranitional Federal Government that i in place

Life in Somalia i nothing but war,gun, hunger, fleeing. Robbery andmurder are everyday thing. Learningin Germany, that thee problem onlyexit in Somalia and not elewhere,made it even wore for me. I ued tothink that war wa everywhere.One of the accused who witnessed his parents

being killed by a grenade when he was 6 years old


9/71

9

control merely a few block in the capital Moga-dihu. Te abence of a real government ha beenexploited by the ret of the world. Fihing trawlerfrom Europe, North America and Aia have beenhelping themelve to the huge fihing ground offthe , kilometre coat of Somalia. In it peak,

thi IUU trade (Illegal, Unreported, Unregulated)in Somalia generated ome US million an-nually for the firt world, according to calcula-tion by the UN. Ti i a world-wide problem,and the UN etimate that about one in five fihconumed worldwide i fihed illegally. Te piratecome in large fihing trawler from rich countrie(who have long ago depleted their own fihingground), regitered under flag of convenienceof countrie who never igned any agreement onfihery quota. Te depletion of what wa once de-cribed a a rainforet of fih oon removed thelivelihood of the coatal population of Somalia,who were defencele againt thee pirate.

Te indutrialied countrie alo dicov-

ered another ue of the Somali water: a a giantwate dump. Ever ince the London Conventionof banned the dumping of wate on ea,indutrialied countrie have been looking for away out. Greenpeace report of hip cruiing theocean for year, trying to find a uitable placeto dipoe of their cargo.While the dipoal of

a tonne of toxic chemical wate in Europe cotmore than , dumping the hit in Somali wa-ter cot a little a , o the economic incen-tive i obviou. For radioactive wate the ratio ieven teeper. Organied with the help of the Ital-ian Mafia, pretty much every European countrygot rid of their unwanted wate thi way for year.Other countrie, like Autralia joined in. Te ex-tent of thi cheme wa literally uncovered dur-ing the tunami of , when hundred of ruted

barrel were wahed up along the coat of Somalia,poioning many people.

According to United Nation EnvironemtnProgramme (UNEP) pokeperon Nick Nuttal,Somalia ha been ued a a dumping ground forhazardou wate tarting in the early , and

continuing through the civil war there. [] Andthe wate i many different kind. Tere i ura-nium radioactive wate. Tere i lead, and heavymetal like cadmium and mercury. Tere i aloindutrial wate, and there are hopital wate,chemical wateyou name it.

With little fih to catch, ome of the out-of-work fihermen decided to take matter into theirown hand and tarted their own coat guard op-eration. Tey topped foreign fihing veel anddemanded money from their owner to compen-ate for the fih they had taken. A the new So-mali coat guard became ucceful, other copiedthe buine model. Regular trade veel were hi-jacked and ranom wa demanded. According to

report by Reuter from December , a tockexchange ytem ha been et up in Haradheere. Aformer pirate at the time aid: Four month ago,[] we decided to et up thi tock exchange. Wetarted with maritime companie and now weare hoting . en of them have o far been uc-ceful at hijacking. Te hare are open to all and

everybody can take part, whether peronally at eaor on land by providing cah, weapon or uefulmaterial... weve made piracy a community activ-ity. In a country where almot half the populationha to get by on le than one dollar a day, evena mall percentage of the ranom going back tothe community make a differenceand arent wecontantly lectured about the benefit of the trick-le-down effect by the proponent of capitalim?


10/71

10

But for ome, the profit continue to roll in.

Ship owner have been wanting to inure them-elve againt the rik of being attacked. GregBang from Chubb Inurance ay that [...] thii a new and rapidly developing inurance market.And increaingly, armed ecurity guard are be-ing deployed on a lot of veel, generating profitfor ecurity companie. Te Financial imeseti-

mate that the two major global ecurity compa-nie charge the hipping indutry in the order ofUS million a monthmany time the amountthe pirate ever retrieve in ranom.

Caught in the middle of it all are the hipcrew. Underpaid and working under appallingcondition, a lot of them come from extremelypoor countrie themelve, like the Philippine.

Tey, who are at the bottom of the capitalit pick-ing order, find themelve being held hotage by

Court drawing

Day 65: I cantsit here like apupil forever

and listen to this.Please sentence

me!

people with even le to loe than themelve. Ev-

ery delay in the ranom negotiation i a threatto their live. Once the hip ha been freed, theyreturn home traumatied, often without any up-port from the hipping company. Tey can refueto ail through the Gulf of Aden, at the rik ofbeing blacklited by the hipping companie andnever being able to find work again. Alo at their

expene i the danger coming from the deploy-ment of armed guard on ome hipthi haprompted the Somali group to increae their fir-ing power a well, and many in the indutry arefearful of an ecalation.

Te o-called international community neverdid anything to top the real pirate. No warhipever topped the poacher or the hip with poi-

onou wate. Intead, Somalia wa declared afailed tate and imply written off. Only once the


11/71

11

Somali population tarted defending themelve, did the ret of the worldreact. A oon a free trade wa threatened, the rich countrie decided togang up and deploy warhip. Te Horn of Africa i one of the world buiet

hipping routemore than , hip pa there annually. Te indutri-alied world imply cannot allow the population of a country without a realgovernment to have any form of control over the hipping route.

Germany foreign miniter Guido Weterwelle made clear what itabout: Puruing our economic interet, including puruing our interet inreource, mut be part of our trategic planning. I am urpried that the de-ployment of oldier to combat piracy, which I upport, ha been portrayed amorally not jutifiable by ome member of parliament.

theempirestrikesback

Te Dutch frigate romp, which led the arret of the ten Somali men, a wella a German reconnaiance plane that aeed the ituation beforehand,were part of the firt ever joint European military operation: Atalanta. Teoperation, which wa tarted in early , comprie of up to warhipfrom ome countrie. It official miion i to protect humanitarian aidhipment to Eat Africa, but thee hipment are few and far between, o intheir pare time the navie are taked with hunting pirate. Te operation

mandate ha recently been extended until . It i largely financed by itmember tate contributing their navy reource. Germany alone pent million in on ending navy veel and peronnel.

Atalanta i only one of everal international operation around the Hornof Africa. Tere are alo the Combined ak Force and , initiated bythe US to be the maritime ide of Operation Iraqi Freedom, aka the inva-ion of Iraq. New Zealand i part of thee deployment and at one tage wathe leader in . Ten there i Operation Ocean Shield, which i part ofNAO and hare it headquarter with Operation Atalanta. Tere i alo anunofficial group called the Independent Navie, which include China, In-

We were a group of fihermen, who couldnt catch fih anymore. Te wortperiod wa when the tunami came. Everything wa wahed awayour boat,our houe. Since then life ha been mierable. Te well wa poioned; we couldnt

drink from it. During the tunami, aid organiation came and helped u urvive.Tey gave u food, o we managed to feed ourelve. But becaue of the civil war,the aid organiation left, and we were left to our own device. Many of u died.I had to feed two familie, but I had nothing. For a long time, we uffered fromhunger. I wa longing for an opportunity to find food for my family.

Statement of one of the accused during the court hearing


12/71

12

dia, Iran, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Malayia,Ruia, Saudi Arabia and aiwan. All of thee op-eration are baed on a number of UN reolution.Te fact that Japan had to change it contitutionto be able to participate how how much incen-tive there i for every capitalit nation to have a

preence in the Indian Ocean.Ti preence make for an intereting po-litical contellationnowhere ele in the worldcan one ee US and Iranian warhip patrollingtogether. And that i alo the reaon why none ofthem can pull out. Even if the piracy problem waolved, none of the countrie currently preent inthe Indian Ocean could remove their warhip outof fear of giving other countrie acce to Eat Af-rica.

goinginlandIn March , Atalanta miion wa officiallyexpanded to include trike on land. Te navie arenow entitled to commit air trike up to kilome-

tre inland in Somalia in order to detroy pirateinfratructure. Tere have been report about in-dividual navie going inland to chae pirate allalong, but now thi ha become official policy,upported by a UN reolution.

At :am on May the firt uchtrike took place, followed by a euphoric pre re-

leae claiming that urveillance of the area duringthe action indicate that no Somali were injuredahore a a reult of the EU action. Apparently,everal peed boat, ome fuel container, a ladderand mobile phone were detroyed in the trike.Jut how helicopter pilot can ditinguih pirateboat from fihing boat in the middle of the nightremain unclear and i omething local are wor-

ried about: Weterner cant clarify who i thepirate and who i civilian. Somalia Report cite

the mayor of Gumbah, a mall fihing village inPuntland, a aying that a trike againt a fleet offihing boat took place on April. A helicop-ter had appeared and, without warning, had firedeven miile, triking two boat and injuring twofihermen.

What eem like an intruion by foreign mil-itary into another country, i een by the EU a apiece of development aid. A pokeperon for theEU foreign policy office: Ti action againt pi-racy i a comprehenive EU approach to the criiin Somalia, where we upport a lating politicalolution on land.

A lating political olution i what mot peo-ple in Somalia have been waiting year for. Butit i hard to believe that thi olution will be de-livered via air trike from battlehip helicopter.

It likely that thee air trike are only thethin edge of the wedgeooner or later the EUwill engage in proper land miion. Tere i moreto be poached from Somalia than jut fih. Large

oil and ga reerve, a well a iron ore and alu-minium are upected, and exploitation of a ura-nium mine i under way. Tee are the reourcethat the German government wa talking about,and the reaon why every country want to be in-volved in the battle againt piracy.

backtothetrialSo why did the German tate pend more thana million Euro (meticulouly calculated by thetabloid paper) on trying ten young Somali whofailed in capturing a medium ized container hip?

It i hard to imagine that anyone expectedthe trial and the reulting entence to be a deter-rent. Other countrie have tried Somali pirate in

the lat few year, in one cae paing entence ofome year to each accued. Even the bo of


13/71

13

the company that own the aipanadmit that piracy wont be topped bythi trial.

On a larger cale, piracy int really that much of a problem to the globaleconomy. Only one in a thouand hip ailing through the Gulf of Aden iactually hijacked and only maller, lower veel are uually in danger. Shiptravelling at more than knot have hardly ever been attacked, but a lot of

hipping companie ail at lower peed in order to ave fuel. Te problem imade out to be bigger than it i, but it i a good excue for why countrie needto be preent in the region around Somalia.

It eem that the reaon had more to do with the German governmentwanting to jutify the million pent on it military preence in the IndianOcean in and with etablihing Germany a a worldwide military force,than it ha to do with delivering jutice.

A uual, the wrong people were on trial. Intead of trying the owner ofthe real pirate veel who for year detroyed the livelihood of many peoplewho didnt have much to tart with, thoe who are pretty much defencelewere put through the court.

One peron who howed better inight into the circumtance than thecourt i Dierk Egger, the captain of the hijacked hip aipan. Depite beingfired on and then pending everal hour in the afe room of the hip notknowing what wa going on, the then year old aid, after eeing the Somali

for the firt time in court:

I was curiousto eewhat they looked like [] Tey are poor od. Tey gotinvolved in something they hadnt thought throughand havent been able to foresee.Now, they

are the one who are weak and I have a weakne for the weak and hattered.7

An attitude the court would have been well advied to adopt. n

. Greenpeace Italy: Te oxic Ships, . www.aljazeera.com/new/africa///.html. www.reuter.com/article////u-omalia-piracy-invetor-idUSREBZ. Interview with the German weekly buine paper Wirtschaftswoche, //. omaliareport.com/index.php/pot//Firt_Official_EU_Strike_on_Land. www.eunavfor.eu///eu-naval-force-deliver-blow-againt-omali-pirate-on-horeline

.NDR Abendjournal, //


14/71

14

LizardsRevenge

I J ,

A (and other part of the world)converged on Olympic Dam for LizardRevenge. Ti event wa the reult of many yearof aivim around BHP Billiton Olympic Damuranium mine, and the propoal to expand it intothe world larges open-pit mine.

Te police preence at Lizard Revenge demontrate the extentto which the tate will go to protect corporate interet. Neverthe-le, Lizard Revenge give u reaon to hope: the convergencehad ignificant upport, and wa an inpiring experience. It alodemontrate the vitality of the oppoition to uranium mining,

which will be important over the coming year a we face morepropoal to mine or dump uranium in Autralia.

Unnamed

Collective and theBan Uranium Mining

Permanently Collective


15/71

15

olympicdamuraniummineTe Olympic Dam uranium depoit wa dicov-ered in and formally opened by WeternMining Corporation (WMC) in . It i nowowned by the mining giant BHP Billiton. It con-tain the world larget known uranium depoit,

the fourth-larget copper depoit and the fifthlarget gold depoit. It i alo one of the worldmot contentiou mine on the iue of Aborigi-nal right and environmental degradation due toit unique poition granted by way of the Roxby Down Indenture Act, legilation thatgrant the mining company the right to be a lawunto itelf.

Te Indenture Act i a unique bill of right,or rather a bill of no right for the environmentand Aboriginal people. It exempt the mine oper-ator from a whole pate of tate environment andAboriginal heritage law; it give wide-rangingexemption from the Environmental ProtectionAct, the Natural Reource Act, the Aboriginal

Heritage Act, the Mining Act and the Freedomof Information Act. It alo give the mine opera-tor a free ticket to extract water from the GreatArteian Bain at Lake Eyre (Arabunna country)at no cot and with no compenation to the localtraditional owner.

Water uage i one of the mot contentiou

iue for Olympic Dam. Under the IndentureAct the mine operator are allowed to mine waterfrom the Great Arteian Bain at a rate of up to million litre of water per day at no cot to thecompany and with no compenation to the localtraditional owner, the Arabunna people. Currentwater uage i etimated to be around millionlitre per day. If the expanion goe ahead that willincreae to million litre per day, an increaeto million litre from the Great Arteian Bain

and the remainder from a yet-to-be built deali-nation plant at Point Lowly near Port Auguta.Te water ue from the mine ha already had aeriou impact on the deert ecoytem with manymound pring drying up. Te pring are aloacred place for the Arabunna people, and their

detruction caue eriou cultural and phyicalditre for them.Indigenou reitance to the mine ha alway

been very trong. A long-tanding collaborationbetween Indigenou and non-indigenou activitha exited from the very tart. In the con-truction of the Borefield Road ome kilome-tre from the mine ite wa topped by local Ab-original people blockading at Canegra Swamp,with the government capitulating and divertingthe road. In Augut activit from the Cam-paign Againt Nuclear Energy organied a block-ade at the mine ite reulting in arret; theblockade lated until November of that year. Andfrom to Uncle Kevin Buzzcott etab-

lihed the Arabunna Going Home Camp in hitraditional land on the hore of Lake Eyre, omekm from the mine, to protet the mine wateruage from hi country. Te Keeper of Lake Eyre,a the Aboriginal and non-indigenou activitwere known, engaged in daily top-work actionon the water bore, and blockade and occupation

of the mine ite, a well a many Federal and Su-preme Court challenge.

theproposedexpansionTe expanion of the Olympic Dam uraniummine will exacerbate the exiting problem withthe mine. Te propoal will mean digging for fiveyear before even reaching the ore body, creating

the larget open pit mine in the world. Te envi-ronmental impact of thi will be enormou, and


16/71

16

include a maive carbon footprint; ignificant expoure of radon ga; radio-active tailing dam which would leach into the groundwater ytem; and amaive expanion of the water ue to million litre a day.

Te potential effect on worker are alo notable. Ga mak and otherafety equipment that worker in uranium mine are provided with i oftenuncomfortable and hinder free movement, and i therefore often ued in-correctly. BHP Billiton workplace afety evaluation have focued on cotanalyi, evaluating afety on the bai of cot rather than worker health.Tere ha been no information on the effect on worker at Olympic Dam,due to the excluion of the mine from the Freedom of Information Act.

directactionattheconvergenceTe convergence embraced a diverity of tactic, and over the five day ofthe event action included blocking the road with a game of cricket, danceand peeche on the effect of the mine and of the uranium indutry moregenerally.

On July ix proteter were arreted on Olympic Dam Highwayat Roxby Down. Te arretee, who were part of the larger Breakfat Not

Bomb creative road block, were tranported to Roxby Down police tation.Four were charged with failure to comply with a police direction and twowere charged with failure to ceae loitering. Te two who were charged withfailure to ceae loitering were required to provide a DNA ample to police.

Following tranfer to Roxby Down police tation the arretee did notapply for bail and were egregated into male and female holding cell. Malearretee were held four to a cell deigned for one, given two blanket be-

tween them and repeatedly refued requet for more blanket. One arreteewa not given the opportunity to peak to a lawyer or make a phone call untilvery late at night, which hi lawyer did not anwer.

Te arretee were held at Roxby Down until pat midnight after pre-ure to accept bail condition. Te condition, which were all refued, in-cluded two hour to collect their gear and leave the fetival, and not to leavethe tate until their yet-to-be-et court date probably in early September.Te arretee were repeatedly advied that they would be tranferred to PortAuguta in the early evening. Te arretee were tranported jut after mid-night. Te tranportation van had no eatbelt and wa air-conditioned, andarretee were refued blanket or extra item of clothing neceary for thecold. Arretee arrived at .am and were put in ingle cell.

Te arretee were put on trial the next morning, entering their plea andreceiving the verdict over a peakerphone in the police tation without anyexternal oberver. All but one protetor pleaded guilty to the charge and

were fined plu extra cot, totalling each. One protetor pleadednot guilty to the charge of failure to comply with a police direction and ap-

Tepolice

preence conised of

hundreds ofofficers

with - , canine team,

police hore,

police onoff-road bikes,and a police

helicopter that waeen in the ky,

day and night.All of thi

wa mobilied tomonitor

and harasspeaeful

proteser.


17/71

17

peared in Port Auguta Magitrate Court in Sep-tember; he wa found guilty but had no convictionrecorded.

abroadercritiqueoftheroleofthestateOne of the bigget iue at Lizard Revengewa the manner in which the police panderedto corporate interet. Te area around the minewa declared a protected area under new South

Autralian legilation, the Protective Security Act(). Ti legilation grant police the power toiue intruction to any peron in the area: therefual to follow thee intruction regardle ofthe nature of them will reult in arret.

Te refual of the police commiioner ofSouth Autralia to anwer quetion about policenumber and cot borne by the tate in relationto thi protet reveal the level of ecrecy and collu-

ion that exit between corporate entitie and theState. Ti i by no mean a new occurrence norwa the police preence unexpected by either the

proteter or the media.Te police preence conited of hundred of

officer (though no one would admit how many),with -hour road block, canine team, policehore, police on off-road bike, and a police he-licopter that wa een in the ky, day and night.All of thi wa mobilied to monitor and hara

peaceful proteter. Te cot of an operation ofuch logitical intenity mut have been ignifi-cant.

Every peron entering the protected area hadtheir identity recorded, including their name, ad-dre and date of birth. If thee detail were notgiven the police would refue permiion to en-ter or the leave the area. Many car were ticketedfor minor, often comical, defect. Car were often


18/71

18

earched by police dog. Te police exceive preence wa deigned to doone thing: intimidate thoe aembled for a peaceful protet. Te myopic tu-pidity of corporate greed coupled with the power and the ue of legitimiedviolence by police reulted in ignificant intimidation of the people who werethere imply to protet uranium mining.

embodyingalternativesWhile the police attempted to intimidate proteter, the Lizard Revengecamp embodied a different kind of politic. We et up a mall camp with ourPerth group, where we lept, ate, regrouped after action and argued politicwhilt drinking wine and litening to ukulele around a fire late into the night.Sound pretty chilled, right? It wa. Te people that converged at LizardRevenge from all over Autraliaall over the world!were amazing, com-paionate and inpiring.

Band and cabaret act performed on the tage every night, a great wind-down after the tenion of the day action. Te muic wa great, and themain tage became a meeting place to find friend made during the day andhare a drink with them around a fire or dance like mad to whatever bandwa playing.

Te Food Not Bomb kitchen made breakfat and dinner every day ofthe fetival. People volunteered to help prepare and erve the food, which

tated AMAZING.Te toilet crew eemed to be working all the time, trying to find pare

heian and tar picket from people in the camp, digging great big hit pitin the ground and filling them in when they got full. Te toilet eat wereon platic chair, urrounded by a heian creen that gave you ome pri-vacy (from the camp, though Im ure the police helicopter got a great look).People volunteered to be on the toilet crew! Dont tell me that elf-organiing

autonomou communitie cant work, not when people tand up and volun-teer for what wa literally the hittiet job in the camp.Tere wa pace for diverity of tactic and olidarity between a group of

people that had converged from every tate and many other countrie. Terewa intene repect for Uncle Kev and the traditional owner. It wa the firttime ome of u had done anything like thi, and it eemed many of u movedfrom a tate of apprehenion to empowerment, motivation and connectionwith o many incredible people. We are ready to do it all over again!


19/71

19

howeffectivewaslizardsrevenge?Lizard Revenge wa an incredibly importantmiletone for the Autralian nuclear-free move-ment. Following the victorie of the , whena large and powerful movement topped the Jabi-luka uranium mine in Kakadu National Park,

blocked the Pangea international nuclear watedump in Wetern Autralia (WA), and forced thegovernment in mot tate and territorie to putban on uranium mining, nuclear power genera-tion and export, the nuclear indutry wa forcedonto the back foot. Te movement too entered hi-bernation, with only a few flah point during the. However, protet acro the country havebeen mounting in the lat few year in reponeto ome eriou threat: a nuclear wate dump inthe Northern erritory (N), the dibandment ofthe national three-mine policy which ha led toa fruitle boom in uranium exploration and pro-poed new mine in WA, N and South Autralia(SA), the expanion of Ranger uranium mine in

the N and, of coure, Olympic Dam. Te narra-tive of Lizard Revenge wa that the Sleepy Liz-ard will wake and claim revenge, o in true formthe anti-nuclear movement awoke. A large, well-coordinated and confrontational gathering of over people in the deert ignal that the Autra-lian nuclear-free movement i again ready to op-

poe and avenge year of uranium mining, tailingleak, accident, afety breache, non-complianceand failed rehabilitation. Tere are thouand ofdedicated activit willing to take the fight direct-ly to the ource and blockade deadly mine anddump.

Only week after Lizard Revenge, BHPBilliton announced they would delay a deciionon the expanion of Olympic Dam until ,perhap in part in repone to protet, but more

likely a a reult of tough economic conditioninternationally. Only day after BHP Billitonannouncement, Canadian company Cameco an-nounced they too would delay their propoed ura-nium mine at Kintyre in the Karlamilyi NationalPark in Wet Autralia. Tee are poitive devel-

opment, but it doent mean weve won. Not onlydo we need to build a movement that will topfurther propoal to expand Olympic Dam (andthe exiting uranium mine there), Ranger in theN, and the uite of project acro N, SA andWA, we alo need to addre other eriou threat,uch a the propoed mine at Wiluna which icurrently being fat-tracked through environmen-

tal aement. We need to reclaim the groundthat ha been lot ince the , to connect up allthe truggle and confront the nuclear indutryand government wherever their ugly head rie. n


20/71

20

of anarchim that I like a lot:democracy, but without the government. Everyone love democracy, butno one i particularly in love with the government. When the concept of

centralied government i defended, it uually on the bai of praicalconcern: we need centralied government to get thing done efficiently.Te idea i that deciion-making need to be centralied in one place o thatpecialis politician who have acce to all the right information can takeclear aion on our behalf, to keep thing running moothly.

LOOMIOMaking self-organised

governance convenient Ben Knight & Richard D Bartlett

But you dont often hear ideological or philoophi-cal argument in favour of centralied governmentytem. Very few people will argue that authori-tarian rule i the optimal form of ocial organia-tion. Participation in deciion-making, freedomfrom coercion, and cooperation are all held a de-

irable everyday ideal no matter where omeoneit on the political pectrum. Of coure a ytem

baed on equality and autonomy would be bet-ter. So why i the idea not taken eriouly outideof anarchit circle? Why i there o little publicdicoure about hifting toward better way oforganiing thing? For mot people, the idea ofelf-organied governance jut doent eem feai-

bleit eem o impractical that it dimied outof hand or never conidered a a poibility at all.

9


21/71

21

itlookslikethismightbechanging...Ti i a tory about thing that Ive been fortu-nate to oberve and participate in over the latfew year that give me hope that thi ituation ichanging. Social and technological developmentare gradually opening up pace for elf-organied

governance to go beyond being a nice idea, be-coming a practical way of organiing thing on alarge cale. When the bet way of doing thing ialo the eaiet way of doing thing, that whenreal change happen. Te need for thi changei greater than ever, becaue traditional form ofcentralied governance are failing to keep up, andare exhibiting increaingly bizarre behaviour withhorrendou conequence for the world.

thingshavebeengettingweird... October wa a trange day in New Zea-land: breakfat new cene of gun-wielding para-military police, talk of a national network of AlQaeda-tyle terrorit, an entire town urrounded

by police blockade, and a chool bu full of kidheld up and earched at gunpoint. Maybe it wajut becaue it wa happening o cloe to home,but the whole thing eemed particularly aburd inthe New Zealand context. Te police, media andgovernment told u with a traight face that therewa good reaon to believe that a nationwide ter-

rorit network wa plotting to aainate worldleader. Tey forgot to mention their worriewere baed on eavedropped converation aboutcatapulting a double-decker bu onto the head ofGeorge W Buh.

Ti ha been happening for year in count-le other countrie ince September th. Tepectre of terrorim ued to jutify uppreion of

dient of all kind, preading from government togovernment like a bad meme, but eeing the phe-

nomenon arrive o tarkly in New Zealand wa atartling wake-up call.

Te anti-terror raid are a hocking local ex-ample of a global trend toward intitutional inan-itycrazy thing happen when you et up ytemthat are geared toward perpetuating and expand-

ing themelve at the expene of the public whoeinteret theyre uppoed to repreent. Whengovernment care only about their own interet,they end up paing wildly unpopular policiewith no regard for public opinion or the negativeimpact on the vat majority of the population.

Te ongoing global financial crii i the in-evitable reult of banking intitution operating

with a legal obligation to maximie profit and mi-nimie rik. Te environmental conequence ofthi ytem are diatrou. Averting environmentaldetruction i good for every peron on the planet,but becaue it politically unpopular and bad forbuine in the immediate term, nothing mucheem to happen about it.

Globally, the divergence between intitution-al interet and human interet i o blatant thatit become impoible to ignore.

luckily, itsgettingeasierforpeopletogettogetheranddosomethingaboutit...Four year on from the raid, October wa a different tory altogether. Te internationalday of olidarity with Occupy Wall Street markedthe arrival in New Zealand of a wave of globaliedcitizen reponeahrir Square, the Indignadomovement in Latin America and Spain, and theOccupy movementto intitutional elf-interetand it conequence. After tarting in New York,

Occupy rapidly pread to every continent on theplanet (ye, there wa a banner on Antarc-


22/71

22

tica). By mid-October thi maive wave of broad-baed graroot protet movement reached morethan , citie, involving ten of million of

people. Ti ma coordination emerged incred-ibly quickly, preading organically without anycentralied planning or materminding.

Te movement in each place had uniquefeature adapted to local condition, but withome common emergent characteritic.

Firt, thee movement were explicitly tran-formative rather than revolutionary, calling for aytemic overhaul and the peaceful decentralia-tion and ditribution of power and wealth ratherthan forcefully eizing it from one mall group ofpeople and handing it to another.

Second, the ue of communication technol-ogy wa ditinctively prevalent. Te ma demon-tration in ahrir Square were organied through

online ocial networking and text meaging.Communication tent full of laptop were com-mon cene at Occupy camp worldwide. Ma-media coverage of the protet wa extremelylow and extremely limited, with mot informa-tion flowing to New Zealand through informalcitizen-produced media, ditributed through on-

line ocial network. Slogan and imagery preadbetween countrie via the internet, right down tothe graphic deign, colour cheme, and typefaceued on banner.

For me, the mot alient feature wa the waythee movement were organied.

Participant typically organied in a directlydemocratic, decentralied way, with deciionmade by conenu in public general aemblieat time involving up to everal thouand partici-pant. Ditinctive feature including hand ignalued to convey agreement and diagreement, pe-cific terminology and communication techniquewere pread internationally through informal on-line network.

gettingsuckedintothewave...In Wellington, the Occupy general aembly (GA)wa my firt experience of collective deciion-

making on a large cale. Te initial day of actionon October attracted everal hundred people,with a buzz of anticipation and little coordination.It didnt feel at all like a traditional activit crowd,with plenty of people who had never attended aprotet and many who wouldnt identify them-elve a activit at all.

A in Occupy camp around the world, withno central dictate or coercion, the growing popu-lation of the Wellington camp made a erie ofconenu deciion that organically tructured thecommunity into working group, each around ahared purpoe. Tee group then tructured intomore pecific ub-group, and ub-ub-group,down to ome degree of elf-choen pecialiation

of role for each peron. A kitchen group providedthree meal to up to people a day, upplied withdonated or dumptered food. A hopitality crewwelcomed new arrival, day and night. A commteam put out pre releae, gathered and reportedback information about the international move-ment, and communicated with camp around

NZ and elewhere. General aemblie were heldeach morning, with every working group report-ing back to the wider community, with an appro-priate level of autonomy mandated to each groupto efficiently take care of their phere of activity.

thebrightsideWhen the collective proce functioned well, par-ticipating in the GA wa a truly tranformativeexperience. A public general aembly held on La-bour Day, at the height of the Occupy movementin Wellington, wa the archetypal demontrationof the power of conenu-baed deciion-makingat it bet. Seeing a crowd of everal hundred ex-cited individual, quickly coming to deciion that

were better than anyone would have ever pro-poed on their own, with every voice heard, and


23/71

23

no one alienated from the deciion-making pro-ce. Knowing that thi wa happening all over theworld, at the ame time, on a maive cale, wa

like nothing ele I had experienced.

thedarksideTe other ide of the general aembly proce wamuch le cheerful. When the deciion-makingprotocol broke down, empowerment very quicklyturned into oul-detroying alienation. Te im-

mene amount of time and effort required wacruhing. Sharing information i critical for build-ing conenu, but i extremely difficult in thecontext of a face-to-face meeting in a rained outcampite. People peaking the mot often with theloudet voice often exert diproportionate influ-ence over group deciion, meaning marginaliedvoice go unheard. I had read about the tyranny oftructurelene in conenu-baed groupthe

lape into faction, the emergence of informal dic-tatorhipbut Id never een it face-to-face. Teknowledge that thi wa happening in Occupy

camp all over the world wa intenely depreing.Te ma participation of million of people

in the movement wa a clear global call formore public participation in deciion-making atevery level. People all over the world were hav-ing viion of decentralied direct democracy ona global cale, reditributing deciion-making in-

fluence from elf-intereted intitution back intothe hand of people and communitie.But the face-to-face experience of Occupy

drove home how fragile collective deciion-mak-ing can be, even in relatively mall group. Toughfrutrating, thi fragility didnt eem irreolvable.In large part, the organiational problem wefaced at Occupy were the reult of mundane prac-tical contraint. Simply requiring everyone to be


24/71

24

in the ame place at the ame time mean that thecot of participation in the deciion-making pro-ce wa too high for it to be acceible for motpeople, or to involve people who were geographi-cally pread. Reolving thi technical challengeeemed like a enible path toward realiing the

promie of tranformative change that motivatedthe Occupy movement.

achanceencounterIn late October, a mall group of Occupy up-porter bumped into Enpiral, a non-hierarchicalcollective of tech-minded individual focued onpurring poitive ocial change by olving techni-

cal problem, headquartered in Wellington. Oneof the ditinctive feature of Enpiral i the rec-ognition that to be effective on a large cale andavoid dependency on government or charity, o-cial change project need to be able to upply theirown reource. Under the preent tate of affair,thi uually mean they need to generate revenue.

Ive alway been extremely ceptical of o-cially reponible buinethe idea of a profit-maximiing company that happen to tack omecharity work on to the back of their exploitativebuine activity eem omewhat chizophren-icdamaging the world with the left hand thenfixing up ome of that damage with the right.

But the Enpiral model of ocial enterpriei fundamentally different, explicitly recognizingthat mot exiting buine i baed on theft, tak-ing more value than they produce, from ociety,from the environment and from their worker.Making money for the ake of making moneyclearly ha diatrou conequence. But gener-ating revenue directly through a beneficial activ-

ity (i.e. making it economically viable to do goodthing) a an engine to achieve a clear ocial mi-

ion can have huge poitive impact. Social enter-prie might ound like an innocuou phrae, butit a fundamentally diruptive concept, reveringthe backward incentive that conitently divertbuinee toward maximiing profit at the ex-pene of all ele.

thecollaborationbegins...We approached Enpiral, aking them to buildu a tool o Occupy general aemblie could runonline, a a firt tep toward remedying ome ofthe practical contraint we were facing. Our glo-riou leep-deprived viion wa that local generalaemblie would be able to cale up, then con-

nect with general aemblie around the countryto make national-level deciion, with the ulti-mate goal of maively decentralied conenu-baed deciion-making on a huge cale, with in-ternational general aemblie coming together tomake deciion about iue of global relevance.We thought it might take them a couple of week.

Enpiral repone wa not quite what wehad hoped: We need omething like that too. Sodoe pretty much everyone ele. But youre goingto have to build it yourelve It wa a little di-heartening, but a perfect demontration of how aelf-organiing autonomou network function.

Trough the Enpiral network, the idea ofthe project reached people who had identified theame challenge in totally different contextre-ducing the cot of participatory deciion-makingin large community organiation, in buine, ingraroot activim, and in open-ource oftwaredevelopment. A team aembled around the ideaand tarted building.


25/71

25

loomioisbornwelve month on, with lot of hard work and the upport of ome gener-ou crowdfunder, weve built a humble app called Loomio that create apace for group to make collaborative deciion online. It not the techno-utopian goggle-eyed global olution that wa talked about in the fervour ofOccupy, but it providing a good tarting point to develop further. A few

hundred group are already uing it to make participatory deciion-makingand collaboration eaier, from activit collective through to city council,open-ource oftware project, local buinee, and nationwide communityorganiation.

Te ma participation of million of people in the movement wa aclear global call for more public participation in deciion-making at every

level. People all over the world were having viion of decentralied diredemocracy on a global cale [] But the face-to-face experience of Occupydrove home how fragile colleive deciion-making can be, even in relativelymall group. Tough frusrating, thi fragility didnt eem irreolvable.

}Te importance of good participatory proce ha been baked into the

development of Loomio, guiding the deign principle and the ocial truc-

ture of the project.

bottomupWere taking a ditinctively bottom-up approach. Rather than tackling na-tional- or international-level deciion-making, weve tarted by building theimplet poible tool to give mall group of people an eay way of havingproductive dicuion and make good deciion together. Development i

rapidly iterating a we cale out to larger group with more complex andcontentiou deciion-making. Te more group of people and communitieget together to govern themelve effectively, the le of an excue there i forcentralied deciion-making or top-down authority.

opensourceo u, open ource mean freedom of aociation and free exchange of knowl-edge. A an open ource app, the informational framework of Loomio iheld in the public good. Anyone i free to modify, tudy, and contribute to


26/71

26

the code. It one of many project that make upthe third wave of internet technologya returnto peer-produced communication infratructure,collectively built and commonly owned.

self-reflexiveFrom it infancy, Loomio ha been ued to makeall deciion about the way it developed. Timean that development i adaptive and elf-re-flexive, guided by the collective deciion-makingof all the developer and upporter of the projectuing the tool itelf.

dynamic/flexibleprocess

Loomio doent ue a majority-rule adverarialvoting framework, but neither doe it requiretrict adherence to pure conenu or complexcollective protocol. Rather it a flexible, dynamicproce, where people can change their mind inrepone to new information that come to lightin the dicuion, or a concern are raied. It pro-

vide a pace for collective widom to play out,with a framework that inherently encourage theemergence of better olution than any individualwould have thought of on their own.

technologyasfacilitatorofcultureTe technology i ridiculouly imple, eentiallynothing more than a graphic interface for theocial proce of building hared undertanding,coming to productive, collectively-agreed-uponoutcome, and allowing remote, aynchronouparticipation. Any technology i only a ueful athe cultural context in which it embedded allowit to beLoomio i about etting up a purpoe-driven environment that incentivie cooperative

behaviour and diincentivie behaviour that pro-mote elf-interet at the expene of other.

reducingthetransactingcostofparticipationindecision-makingAt it core, Loomio i about reducing the tran-acting cot of participation in deciion-making,diolving the old jutification for hierarchicalnon-participatory organiational tructure. Few

people will explicitly advocate dictatorial top-down deciion-making a the bet way to runthing, but plenty of people will very openly aythat bottom-up deciion-making take too long,i impractical and expenive. Ti i what Loomioi working to change.

someinterestingthingsarehappening...Working on the Loomio project ha expoed meto what feel like a very broad hift in the waythat people are working together, which i coupledwith a tranformative hift in the way people arethinking.

Te language i not the traditional

vocabulary of anarchim, and itcoming from unexpeed place. Self-organied governance, participatorydemocracy, aive citizenhip,neighbourhood democracy, diredemocracy, workplace democracy,open-ource politic, decentralieddeciion-making, and networkedorganiing are increaingly advocateda common-ene olution topraical problemnot mainly inaivis circle, but in communityorganiation, in neighbourhood

group, in buine, in city council,and even central government.


27/71

27

Ti i not an organied political effort, but a raft of ocial trend mov-ing in a convergent direction at the ame time, developing in a continuoufeedback loop with decentralied information technology making informa-tion haring and collaboration eaier and eaier. Loomio i jut one tiny con-tribution to an ecoytem of ocial technologie that empower individualand communitie to collaboratively achieve thing that were previouly thedomain of intitution.

Wikipedia i a nice example of what thee new type of peer-produc-tion can achieve: a decentralied non-coercive creative endeavour that haproduced a elf-improving knowledge bae that more comprehenive thanany formal intitution ha ever produced. Tee principle are being appliedeverywhere. A few example: crowd funding i democratiing large-caleproduction, the principle of open ource oftware are now being applied tohardware, and diater repone i increaingly focued on utiliing citizen

ocial media.

conclusionWhat happening i not a coordinated effort to diplace State power, but aerie of mall practical development gradually rendering it redundant. Allof thee procee reflect a move toward people and communitie governingthemelve, baed on free aociation and mutual aid.

Ti i not to ay we hould it back and wait for a techno-utopian para-die to arrive. Tere a ditinct chance were pat the point of no returnenergy crii (followed by peak-internet), environmental collape, ocial up-heaval or a turn to neo-facim in repone to deperate timenone of theething are out of the quetion. If we have any hope of making thing better,there a huge amount of work to do with a very high level of urgency.

Luckily, it getting eaier and eaier to put more head together to figureout the bet olution. At every level, when more people contribute, good de-ciion are more likelydeciion that take account of all perpective with-out alienating anyone, generating collectively agreed outcome that balanceindividual interet with the collective interet of everyone affected.

Tee project are all collaborative. Teyre waiting for your input. n


28/71

28

It wa a cae long comingtheFebruary trial of aame Iti, e

Rangikaiwhiria (Rangi) Kemara, EmilyBailey and Ur Signer. Tey were the only

four, arresed a a reult of police Operation, to ultimately appear in court for a

defended hearing. Teir trial ended withconviion on ome Arm A charge but

a hung jury on the more eriou charge

of Participation in an Organised CriminalGroup(eion [A] of the Crime A).

thetrial

O took place over five year

ago; the trial of the Urewera

4 over one year ago.

Sojourner


29/71

29

wo month after the trial, aame and Rangiwere each entenced to two and a half year im-prionment. Tree week later, Emily and Ur

both received entence of nine month homedetention. An appeal againt the conviction andentence wa lodged and in Augut it wadeclined; a ubequent application for leave to ap-peal to the Supreme Court wa rejected in April. In the meantime aame and Rangi havepent nine month in prion and are now on pa-role. Emily and Ur entencetemporarily u-

pended awaiting the appealhave reumed fol-lowing the end of that proce.

Te whole aga ha been drawn out, but aftertaking nearly five year for the cae to get to court,the actual trial wa over relatively quickly.

operation8THEurewera4courtcase

Te cae wa et down in the Auckland HighCourt for three month, but it lated little morethan four week and involved only day of ac-tual court time.

On the firt day, Monday, February, thejury wa elected and the next day the crown be-gan to preent their cae. By midday ueday, March, after day of legal talk that includedmore than police witnee, a handful of civil-ian witnee, a military expert, grainy video andnumerou photo and other image, the proecu-tion cae wa concluded. It wa then the turn ofthe defence. Only aame and Ur elected to callevidence, and their evidence wa preented in juttwo and a half day. Te crown, followed by the

defence lawyer (all four defendant ued lawyer),then gave their cloing argument and on Tur-day, March th the judge ummed up. In the af-ternoon the jury retired to make their deciion.

On ueday, March, after hour ofdeliberation, the jury returned with their verdict.Tey could not reach a deciion on the charge of

Participation in an Organised Criminal Group, but

found the four guilty on ome of the Arm Actoffence.

After the verdict wa read, for many of u

there wa a feeling of jubilation and relief that thejury had not bought the criminal gang tory. Ona more elfih bai, there wa alo the elation thatpeople could leave Auckland. We could go back toour home, familie and communitie, away fromthat building that carrie o much pain and awayfrom the daily chore of attending court and hav-ing to liten to the crown attacking and blaming

Ngai hoe for Operation . However, we were allaware that there wa till the matter of entencing.Te actual court proce wa till not over.

Te wider effect of Operation were alotill not over. Operation wa never jut the fourpeople who ended up in court. Operation wa alot more. It wa a blatant reminder of tate control

and the hitory of thi land.It wa people frightened, haraed and in-

timidated by police during the actual raid on October : people held at gunpoint, topped,earched and photographed; people held captivein their home, ome children locked in a hed; achool bu boarded by armed police; people wo-ken out of leep and forced to kneel at gunpoint inthe rain againt a fence. Home and land invaded.

Alo on that day, there were the other peoplearreted (with four more arreted in ). Motof thee people only had charge dropped againtthem in September ; one had them droppedin October . One of the people arreted diedin July .

In the day following the raid of Oc-tober , what alo became apparent wa theongoing urveillance that wa part of Operation. Tere wa urveillance of individual people andof group. Tere wa alo pying and trepa onhoe land. From April , a part of Opera-tion , police had begun to enter te Urewera. In the

month before the raid and lockdown of Rtoki,they et up py camera and entered marae and


30/71

30

even overnighted on the land. All thi done at the ame time a the State wanegotiating with hoe over the e Urewera ettlement.

What happened during Operation wa not new. It wa a reminder and

a repeat of what ha happened in thi land ince the . What happenedin the courtroom wa alo not new; it wa the daily grind of jutice.I wa one of the upporter who wa able to attend every day of the trial.

I made detailed note each day, and after the cae, I wa aked by many peopleto decribe what happened. Ti i a written attempt.

thejuryTe jury wa elected on the firt day of the trial. Tere were rumour that

a near record number of people had been called for election, and the courtfoyer wa buy with would-be juror coming and going.

Outide the court wa alo buy. A mall number of u were there fromam with banner and pamphlet. An hour later a large number of peoplemarched up the road from the univerity marae, including a large hoe con-tingent. A they arrived, there wa no chanting or peeche; there wa juta quiet, determined and trong preence. It wa powerful. Number welled

dramatically, and the pace in front of the court wa dominated by banner,tino rangatiratanga and mana motuhake flag. We occupied the pace thewhole day.

Police were alo there. Tere were conitently about of them buttheir number would double a they marched on and off the forecourt tochange hift.

For u, the whole day wa pent tanding outide in the Auckland un,talking to people, and periodically hanging around the room where the juryelection proce wa going on. For aame, Rangi, Emily and Ur the wholeday wa pent being held in the court cell and being led in and out of thecourtroom.

Finally at around pm it wa over: a jury had been elected. Tere wa a minute break and then the court wa in eion.

We packed the back of the court, acknowledged our friend in the dockand watched the jury walk in and take their eat. Tere were ten women

and two menon appearance it looked like a jury of variou ethnicitie andclae. Some were dreed pohly in uit; other wore hoodie and jean.Some were caked with makeup, other more natural-looking. Tey looked tobe aged from between their late to mid-.

After the jury wa eated, the judge, Rodney Hanen, introduced himelfto them. He alo introduced the other court worker, the lawyer and thedefendant. He explained how a High Court trial work before going on to

focu on the role of the jury. He aid that a jury had to focu on the fact of


31/71

31

a cae wherea a judge wa only intereted in the

law. A judge job, he aid, wa to focu on the law;fact did not matter to a judge.

One fact the judge told the jury to ignore wathe fact that the thirteen other people who hadbeen charged a a reult of Operation had hadthe charge againt them dropped. He told thejury not to try and undertand the reaon why andpointed out that aame, Rangi, Emily and Urhad been charged with Participation in an Organ-ised Criminal Groupbefore the charge againt theother had been dropped. He mentioned thatfact three time.

Another fact the judge alo never mentionedwa that there wa a fifth peron who had alobeen charged with Participation. Te judge did

not explain that even though uhoe Lambert hadpaed away the year before, evidence would be

preented againt him a if he were tanding in

the dock. He did not ay that fact and dimiedthe jury hortly before pm.

Te jury job began properly the followingday when the proecution made it opening tate-ment.

On the fifth day of the cae, one jury memberwa dimied. Tere had been a family death. Tejury numbered only eleven for the remainder ofthe trial.

theprosecutionTe crown proecutor, upported by two other,wa Ro Burn. He i decribed on the crown lawfirm webite, a typically found proecuting eri-ou violent and organied crime. However, during

the trial he aid that thi wa hi firt proecution

Urs Signer and Emily Bailey, speaking to media outside the Auckland High Court.


32/71

32

of a Participation in an Organised Criminal Groupcharge.

In court, Burn buhy grey hair made himlook like he wa wearing an old-fahioned legalwig. When he poke he would tand and talk a lotwith hi handit looked like he wa imploringthe jury to believe him. When he poke, the judge,in my mind, appeared to lean forward and litenmore attentively.

On the firt day of the cae Burn gave hiopening addre. He managed to ummarie near-ly two year of urveillance and million of dollarof invetigation into an hour-and-a-half peech.At the ame time he officially introduced everal

boxe of big fat evidence book (many the ize ofa ream of photocopier paper), and howed omevideo footage, photo, two ound bite of gunfire,and a powerpoint preentation. After the peech,each pair of jury member wa given their ownboxe of the bookthere wa little elbow or leg-room on the jury bench.

Te whole trial appeared to be high theatrefor Burn. But on that firt day he poke particu-larly dramatically. He held evidence book high ahe quoted from chat-log text. He often pauedand appeared to look in wonderment at the jury ahe poke of the military camp. He would hakehi head in dibelief and igh before making an-other point.

One point Burn made on that firt day, wathat the cae wa not about politic. He aid, inthi country we dont proecute people becaueof their belief. We proecute them for what theydo. But later he introduced a evidence the factthat one of the defendant owned two book, oneabout the Zapatita and one about Che Guevara.

He alo told the jury that the ame defendanthappened to have a lot of left-wing literature and

DVD, even an Oliver Stone movie. He alo re-peatedly referred to the film hoe: A History ofResistance a omething deviou.

He alo often talked about mana motuhakeand the apiration of Ngai hoe.

And at one tage he even managed to name-drop Oama Bin Laden. A gun that wa men-tioned in a computer chat-log, he aid, wa theame type ued by US Seal to murder Oama BinLaden. Tat wa enough for Burn to paue, lookat the jury, and ay again Oama Bin Laden.

Other name Burn kept dropping were thename of people who had had the charge againtthem withdrawn. He identified three time one of

the upporter in the courtroom a one of the orig-inal defendant. In the video clip he alo pointedout other previouly charged. With hi red laer,Burn would identify people in the video, ayingtheir name lowly and loudly. Tee people wereall member of the uppoed criminal group thatmade up the key charge faced by aame, Rangi,

Emily and Ur.Te video clip were played regularlythroughout the trial, and at each playing Burnwould name people and emphaie the fact thatome people were wearing balaclava, ome hadcarve and ome wore camouflage clothing. Hewa ominouly quiet when people with no bala-clava, no carve, or no camouflage clothing could

be een in the clip. And there were many likethat. Intead he would wait for the next picture toroll acro the creen and point hi laer beam ata peron wearing a balaclava, ee, he would lookacro to the jury and hake hi head.

Troughout the court cae the crown toryof what the people were doing at the camp wa

often vague. Several time Burn made the argu-ment that no clearly defined crime wa planned


33/71

33

and that training wa not for a pecific purpoe.Ten on the other hand he would argue that theorganied criminal group had the objective of e-riou violent offence, and people attended campto learn to kidnap people, commit act of abo-tage and baically armed combatfor want of abetter word, to commit guerilla warfare.

Te organier of the camp were aame,Rangi, Emily, Ur and uhoe Lambert. aamewa the chief, Rangi the armourer, Emily and Urwere the Wellington coordinator, and uhoe wathe training officer. Te crown argued that the fivearranged time and date for the camp and alotranport to and from the camp.

During the firt week, Burn conitentlypoke of the camp a military camp, but fromthen on he called them rama. A the day of pro-ecution went on, it wa intereting to hear the lan-guage change.

Te torie alo changed. Back in October, the new wa about police finding military

training camp deep in the buh of e Urewera.Again and again it wa belaboured how iolatedthe camp were and how lucky the police were totumble upon them. In court, Burn kept reiterat-ing that the camp were cloe to town, cloe toa marae, to a chool, to road and peopleomewere even held in open paddock.

Four and a half year ago the camp were

dangerou becaue they were hidden deep in thebuh, but in court they were dangerou becauethey were cloe to town.

Alo, in the different pre-trial hearing priorto the court cae, the group wa an imminentthreat that needed to be topped. At court, thetory wa that they may or may not have acted

ome time in the ditant future.

Te objective of the organied criminalgroup alo changed.

On the firt day, Burn talked of people train-ing to burn houe down. On that day, he aid a-ame had two plan to claim Urewera for hoePlan A wa to continue to negotiate with thecrown, and Plan B wa at the point of a gun. Butthen the two plan were barely mentioned againand only reurfaced in the crown umming-up inthe lat day of the cae.

In hi cloing argument Burn aid that therewa a mandate for Ngai hoe to followpeaceful negotiation with the crown. Te remain-ing on the other hand, he aid, were antago-

nitic to the crown and prepared to fight if thenegotiation came to nothing.

Uing that logic, of Ngai hoe becamepart of the organied criminal group.

And according to the crown, the four peoplein the dock, along with uhoe Lambert, were theleader of the group. o upport that hypothei,

Burn quoted comment uppoedly made byuhoe Lambert and excerpt from a zine articleby Emily.

Te objective of the group were thoe citedin the o-called cenario document written, ac-cording to the crown, by Ur. Citing that docu-ment Burn lited the eriou and violent offencea, murder, aron, intentional damage, endanger-

ing tranport, wounding with intent, aggravatedwounding, dicharging a firearm or a dangerouact with intent, uing a firearm againt a law en-forcement officer, and finally, kidnapping. Te il-legal activitie the defendant had facilitated werethe poeion of firearm.

However, the group were not planning to

act unle Plan A failed and negotiation did notwork.


34/71

34

thedefenceTe defence took jut over two day. Each of thefour had a lawyer defend them but only aameand Ur called evidence in court. Troughout thetrial each defence lawyer quetioned and arguedthe cae. Te key argument put by the defencewere that information wa often hown out ofcontext, that there were numerou contradictionin the evidence, and that the crown had failed toprove a criminal objective for the training camp.

Further, aame and Rangi lawyer bothraied the poibility that the training wa le-gitimate, that it wa training for ecurity work.For any of the defendant to be found guilty, thecriminal objective of the group had to be proven

beyond reaonable doubt by the proecution. Te

lawyer wanted to raie an iue of doubt a to theobjective of the camp.

aame lawyer, ex-Labour MP Ruell Fair-brother, alo tried to place Operation in politi-cal and hitorical context. o give background tothe cae, he called three expert witnee. In orderof appearance they were Paul McHugh, a readerin law at Cambridge Univerity, amati Kruger,hoe pokeperon, and David William, profe-or of law at Auckland Univerity.

Trough thee men, the court heard torieof Ngai hoe and what happened when Englandannexed thi country and made it New Zealand.We heard about overeignty, governance and au-tonomy. Among other thing, we heard about the

Confication Line, the corched earth policy, the

Rangi Kemara and Taame Iti, within the Auckland High Court.

k f h l h d h f ll d lk h


35/71

35

making of Ngai hoe complicit in the death of Fulloon and Volkner, thechaing of e Kooti by the crown, the Compact, the Urewera Re-erve Act, the viit of the Waitangi ribunal in , the Waitangi Report,and the Compact. It wa a powerful couple of day in the courtroom.

Te meage came through trongly that mana motuhake i viable, andit hould be a given for Ngai hoe.

Trough the expert witnee, Fairbrother argued that it wa ludicroufor the crown to allege that aame and the other defendant were planningmurder and mayhem when Ngai hoe wa on the brink of major change.aame, aid Fairbrother, would not jeopardie that.

Te overt racim of the cae wa highlighted by Jeremy Bioletti,Rangi lawyer. Bioletti aid that the crown wa trying to fear-monger and play on Pakeha fear. He aid the crown deliberatelyued word uch a urban warfare to toke fear of Maori fightingPakeha in the citie.

He argued that the evidence had been looked at through a Pkeh primand the end reult wa Mori people plu gun equal crime. M + G = C.

Bioletti alo pointed out the hitorical parallel between Operation and the intitutional revenge taken againt Ngai hoe in the pat. He im-plied that the crown attributing hatred to the of Ngai hoe who did notupport the mandate, wa alo racit.

Te main thrut of the defence put forward by Ur lawyer, ChritopherStevenon, wa that the allegation made by the crown were o prepoterou

that they bordered on the fantatic... Tree witnee were called to attet toUr integrity and trength of character. One witne, Ruakere Hond, a Ran-gatira of Parihaka, alo poke in upport of Emily.

Stevenon alo focued on the iue of police urveillance of Ur andother like-minded people. Under cro-examination police admitted thatthere i urveillance on iue-motivated group. In Wellington thi appearto be through the Special Invetigation Group (SIG). In other citie and

area different police takforce work in thi field, including the AucklandMetro Crime Support Group.Te over-enthuiatic and exceive approach police can have to urveil-

lance wa obviou when Detective Adam Eltham of the Auckland CriminalInvetigation Bureau confirmed that in hi own free time he had undertakenurveillance work, photographing Emily a he at at a table collecting ig-nature on a petition. Another officer, John Fagan, told Emily lawyer thatpolice have a lot of information on everyone.

Te overt racim of the cae wa highlighted by Jeremy Bioletti, Rangilawyer. Bioletti aid that the crown wa trying to fearmonger and play onPkeh fear. He aid the crown deliberately ued word uch a urbanwarfare to soke fear of Mori fighting Pkeh in the citie. }

N f h l bl h


36/71

36

None of the lawyer were able to get the po-lice to talk about the ue of police pie or infil-tration of iue-motivated group. But when RobGilchrit wa briefly mentioned the police becameextremely uncomfortable.

In hi cloing argument Stevenon talkedabout the danger of urveillance and informa-tion taken out of context. Example he ued in-cluded bullet the crown alleged Ur had for arm-ing, but were actually for duck hunting. He alocited the example of a document given the title

of War Document by the police but it wa actu-ally a W((i))ndy Wellingtona newletter of com-munity new and event in Wellington. Snippetof info, aid Stevenon, lead to paranoia. Paranoiacreate upicion and Supicion [] applie itown proof.

Emily lawyer, Val Nibet, aid thi trial wa

the firt court cae he had been involved in, inwhich, nothing happened and that there wa noplan for anything to happen.

Nibet alo poke of nippet of informationand incomplete picture. He talked of the ther-mite bomb recipe, which the crown preented acrucial evidence in their cae. In the opening day,the crown had aid the recipe wa found on one ofthe formerly co-accued dek. In reality, however,it wa found in a cardboard box at the bottomof ome helving, underneath a tupperware con-tainer that obviouly contained paper a well []and wa returned to it owner.

Te whole crown cae, Nibet aid, wa fan-ciful and in hi umming-up, he aid the cae

hould be taken to the dump.Tat wa a common theme in each defence

lawyer umming up: the cae hould be jutthrown outthat aame, Rangi, Emily and Urwere not guilty of any crime. Te whole cae wabaed on police and crown fantaie.

thedefendantsIn thi article I do not peak about the defen-dant much, becaue their role in the courtroom

wa minimal. Te court cae may have been aboutthem, but during the proce they were chiefly i-lent oberver on diplay for the media and public.

Tey had bail throughout the cae, and eachmorning they had to report to the court idedoor and be locked up before being led into thedock once court tarted. Tey were lucky to be al-lowed bail at lunchtime, able to be outide in freh

air before returning to be locked up again, andthen put on diplay back in the dock.

thejudgeTe judge wa Rodney Hanen, an older Pkehwho became in , at the age of , both alawyer and an accountant. In he wa made

a QC, and in a judge. Hi home happenedto be jut around the corner from where Ur andEmily were taying during the trial; I wonderedif he ever aw them trudging pat to the bu top.

In the middle of the court cae he had to havea day off to attend the funeral of a cloe familymember. It raie the quetion of tre for him

during the trial.In the courtroom, he wa a normal judgepolite at all time. But like mot judge, he treatedthe defendant with le repect than other peoplepreent in the court. It wa alo clear, I believe, thatfrom the beginning he bought the crown tory ofarmed militant truggle. It wa the way he wouldlean forward to liten attentively to the crown and

their cae and certain quetion he would ak.He did not appear to know much about the

hitory of thi land. He eemed appalled at thetactic ued by the tate againt Ngai hoe, e-pecially the confication of the land in the and the famine that followed. He aked legalquetion about the Urewera Ditrict Native

Reerve Actan act that recognied a form of lo-cal autonomy for hoe.


37/71

37

But it i in hi three-hour umming up thathi partiality became very clear. He aid the crownhad baically met the criteria to prove the exi-tence of an organied criminal gang. Te abenceof detailed planning wa not an iue a the ob-jective of committing eriou crime [] can bethe objective.

By the end of hi umming-up, I had no

doubt in my mind that the jury would convict onthe Participationcharge. I thought the four wouldbe going down for a long tretch.

theconvictionsAfter two and a half day pent waiting outidethe courtroom, with the only interruption being

when the jury returned to quetion the judge, wewere told they finally had made a deciion. Te call

went out, and the room wa quickly packedevenome of the key police involved in the cae couldnot get through the open doorway. It literally watanding room only. Te judge told u upport-er to behave ourelve, then aame, Rangi, Em-ily and Ur were brought back up from the cell.Toe of u itting all tood in olidarity a theywalked in. At .pm the jury wa called back in.

Te court regitrar poke to the jury foreper-on; he aid that he undertood that the jury hadbeen unable to reach a unanimou verdict in rela-tion to the Participationcharge. Te jury foreper-on confirmed that that wa correct but when theregitrar then aked in legal talk did the jury reacha majority verdict, the foreperon replied, Ye, we

have. Te jury immediately confirmed with thecourt regitrar that they had been unable to reach

Urs, Taame and Rangi emerging from the court holding cells at the conclusion of the trial.

a unanimou verdict on the Participation charge dicued Tat night people maintained a vigil


38/71

38

a unanimou verdict on the Participation charge,and then the official proce began. A igh of reliefwent through the room.

Te court regitrar then reumed her job, andeach of the remaining count were read and foreach charge the foreperon had to give a verdict inrelation to aame, then Rangi, Ur and lat, Emily.

aame, Rangi and Emily were convicted onix charge each under the Arm Act; Ur waconvicted on five. Te judge thanked the juryforeperon. He then turned to the four and told

them that they were convicted on all the countthey had been found guilty of and remanded themfor a pre-entence report. He then thanked thejury for their hard work, aying that the commu-nity wa indebted to them. Te jury left the roomand a oon a the door cloed behind them, RoBurn jumped to hi feet to ay that the crown

oppoed bail. Te upporter were made to leavethe courtroom and the court went into chamber.Only media and police can tay in the courtroomwhen it i in chamber. After a brief argument bailwa granted to all four.

It i intereting to note that the only chargethat the four were convicted on were thoe wherevideo urveillance wa ued a evidencethi ithe ame evidence that the Supreme Court haddeclared illegally obtained by police and could notbe ued againt thoe other original defendantwho had only been charged under the Arm Act.

At the back of the building, after the fourwere releaed from the cell and out into theAuckland duk, there wa jubilation: a celebration

that the immediate agony of attending court waover and that the jury had not bought the Partici-pationcharge. We felt like it wa a victory of ort.

thesentencingwo month later Judge Hanen entenced thefour. Te day before the entencing there wa a

public meeting at Auckland Univerity in whichthe court cae, Operation and urveillance were

dicued. Tat night people maintained a vigiloutide the court building, and in the morningthe upporter gathered to walk in with the four.Tere wa a lot of media, and people at on thefloor and in the aile in the courtroom.

Te morning began with the crown and eachof the four defence lawyer preenting their ub-miion on the entencing. Tere wa a lot of legaljargon and citing of precedent a the lawyer ar-gued for each defendant to be treated leniently bythe court. Ro Burn argued for harh entence.

Te peeche ended, and then at .am, aftera -minute adjournment, the court wa back ineion for the judge to pa entence.

During that entencing, Judge Hanen re-tried the four. He aid that what they had donewent beyond criminal offendingand he citedthe example of a member of the organied crimi-

nal group aying mah the tate combined withthe preence of weapon at the camp. He aidthat the four had to be held accountable for thedamage they had done to the growing but fragiletrut between hoe and the crown.

Depite the jury not being able to reach a ver-dict on the Organised Criminal Groupcharge, thejudge aid that aame, Rangi, Emily and Ur hadbeen etablihing a private militia.

Judge Rodney Hanen entenced them onthe Participationcharge.

For etablihing a private militia, aame andRangi were entenced to prion and Emily andUr got home detention.

aame began a waiata, and the upporter in

the courtroom joined in. Te judge picked up hipaper and left the room. Court worker tried touher u out a the waiata continued, and aame,Rangi, Emily and Ur were taken from the dockdown into the cell. Te courtroom wa full of an-gry, defiant and ad people.

conclusion


39/71

39

conclusion

I do not know what mot people thought would happen in the courtroom orwhat the outcome would be. Maybe ome people thought jutice would be

found in the court. I believe it i nearly impoible to find jutice in the Stateintitution, epecially one with uch a long hitory.Te Auckland High Court occupie old ground in the coloniing hitory

of thi countrythe two pohutukawa tree behind the court mark the en-trance to the former Parliament Houe that occupied the ite between to . In the Supreme Court wa built on the ite.

When entering the front door of the building, everyone ha to walkpat a diplay of the tool ued to murder people when the court wa till able

to hand out the death penalty.

Attending that court everyday wa a reminder for me thatwhat pae for jutice in a ytem baed on State violence halittle to do with the concept of jutice. Jutice i a tool ued bythe tate to control people, and thi trial, like the majority, waan exertion of State power and control.

Te trial of aame, Rangi, Emily and Ur may have been a more overthowcae of political paranoia on the part of the State than ha been een fora long time, but at the ame time it wa the normal circu called tate juticethat i dihed out daily in the court. What happened in the court and whatOperation wa, wa not any outrageou attack on activit by the State,rather it wa jut the uual maintenance of the tatu quo.

I hope we can learn omething from the trial. If it i only that we houldnot only be jumping up and down decrying the fact that four people were inthe dock; that two were entenced to prion and two to home detention. Wehould be demanding fairne not only for them, but we hould be attack-ing the ytem a a whole and building and creating alternative. We houldbe putting tronger feeling and action behind the word we chant on thetreet. When we ay no jutice, no peacewe hould mean it.

Tere i no jutice in thi land, and there hould be no peace for the

power that be until there i.n

For background on the cae, ee octoberthSolidarity.info

Attending that court every day wa a reminder for me that what pae forjusice in a ysem baed on State violence ha little to do with the concept ofjusice. Jusice i a tool ued by the sate to control people, and thi trial, like themajority, wa an exertion of State power and control.

For an overview of the Participation charge, ee Scoop, Urewera rial Participation in an OrganiedCriminal Group. //. www.coop.co.nz/torie/HL/S/urewera-trial-participation-in-an-organied-criminal-group.htm

Dicuion about thermite bomb recipe and the ingredient can be found on the NCEA chat-ite Sci-ence Infoblog run by johnwet.edu.blog


40/71

40

How would you introduce yourself?

Im a Whadjuk Yued yorga: yorga mean womanin Nyoongar language, in Whadjuk really. Whad-juk and Yued are my nana and grandfather twodifferent countrie, or clan group. It the outh-wet of Wetern Autralia, from around the Perth

metro area and north of Perth.

Youve been involved in the Nyoongar tent embassy

lately?

Te Nyoongar tent embay ha been going inceearly February. Weve tried to maintain a contantpreence down there, but ince lat month rainno one ha camped there. Well be

Documents

imminent rebellion 12