| |
|
Saw this and thought I might drop by. I'm not up for being arrested myself and for some reason feel the need to make the rather obvious point that anyone who attends does so at their own risk. Did a Niketown occupation a while back and the private security were a nightmare - people were assaulted. The police on the other hand were quite reasonable. I don't think there were any arrests. (Oh and feel free to accuse me of anti-semitism, but in the Head Shop, not in this forum.)
"Supporting groups so far: Campaign for Palestinian Rights, JAZ (Jews Against Zionism), AYN (Anarchist Youth
Network), the WOMBLES, and Stroud Valleys Anarchists.
Time:1pm
Action: In response to Selfridges' continued support for the expansion of illegal settlements in the Occupied
Territories, by selling goods produced there, we are calling for an Occupation of Selfridges! Join the big
demonstration outside the main Oxford Street entrance at 1pm or form an affinity group with some friends and enter
the store. Bring music, entertainment and ideas for action and let's shut the store for the day!
Background information: Selfridges have caved in to Israeli government pressure and placed back goods produced
on illegal Israeli settlements for sale.
Selfridges removed these goods over Christmas when they appeared to recognise a wider civic responsibility. Now
they have reneged on this decision and are once again accomplices to Israel's brutal occupation of Palestinian land
that have resulted in the murder of tens of thousands of innocent Palestinians since 1967.
Selfridges are supporting the illegal Occupation which the Israeli Government has tried to cement by attempting to
colonise the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan Heights. Prime Minister Sharon wishes to make conditions so awful for
the Palestinians living there -by sheer terror and enforced poverty- that they will give up and leave: this is
effectively ethnic cleansing. By selling goods from these settlements, Selfridges are giving economic and political
support to Israeli military oppression.
These settlements have been built on land expropriated from the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories. Not only
are they illegal under international law, including the Fourth Geneva Convention, but their existence and continuing
expansion, a symbol of the ongoing occupation, has been identified as a major obstacle to peace at this sensitive
time.
The EU and international positions make it clear that settlements are not part of Israel, and therefore are not
covered by any trade agreement. By stocking such products, Selfridges is in effect assisting settlement expansion
through subsidising the settler economy. Whilst settlement trade flourishes, Israel continues to strangle the
Palestinian economy by denying it free access to the outside world.
The products are:
In the Food Hall:
? Achva Halva from the Barkan Industrial Zone,
? West Bank Beigal and Beigal pretzels from the Barkan Industrial Zone,
? West Bank Yarden Wines from Katzrin, Golan Heights
In the Cosmetics Dept.:
? West Bank Ahava toiletries from Mitspe Shalem
It's worth mentioning that this is a 'winable' action. During the South African apartheid many South African firms
were boycotted, raising awareness of the exploitation of slave wage labour and capital accumulation on the part of
apartheid supporting racist businesses. This action aims to do the same in light of the Israeli apartheid. Whilst many
people involved in this action are not boycotists and others have argued that it will be Palestinian workers who will
actually be the first to suffer if the goods they have been making are taken off shelves, the same argument could
be used to excuse the operations of Nike, Gap, BAE Systems, Rio Tinto, Bayer, and Exxon etc etc This is an attack
on Israeli ruling class capital, it's powers of further accumulation, the repression of Palestinian people and the
continuing occupation of their land.
Also, people are unlikely to be charged with anything if they do decide to enter the store, lock on, make noise, give
out prop etc - arrested perhaps, but the only charges levied would come under the Public Order Act relating to
'behaviour likely to cause alarm, harm or distress'. There will hopefully be leaflets explaining that the occupation has
no intention of causing as such, therefore absolving people of being 'guilty' of such an intention. Any charge of
tresspass is a civil offence and not a criminal one and therefore not a police matter. Below is some legal info:
Trespass
Trespass means going onto land or entering a building without permission. It is not a criminal offence, but a civil
matter. Therefore it is nothing to do with the police. A person (e.g. a security guard) may use reasonable force to
remove you, but only if they are on the land or in the building at the time. If you enter empty land or an empty
building and lock them out it is their bad luck and they will have to get an injunction (a civil court order). However it
may be a criminal offence to commit criminal damage getting onto land or into a building.
? Aggravated trespass (section 68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994)
This applies to land which is not a highway (e.g. private land), but it must be in the open air (i.e. not under a porch
and not indoors). The cops must show that you are acting with the intention of intimidating any person on the land
or neighbouring land into stopping their lawful activity or obstructing them so that they cannot carry out their
lawful activity.
? Public order offences (Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994)
These are a range of offences from "causing harassment, alarm or distress" (section 5), "using threatening words
and behaviour" (s4), affray (s3), violent disorder (s2) to riot (s1). The distinctions between these definitions are
minor and it is largely arbitrary what you are charged with. Apart from s5, they are all considered to be serious, and
if you are accused of any you will be arrested, so there is little point in trying to debate the finer points. If the cops
claim that you are causing harassment, alarm or distress, try to find out who you are supposed to be causing it too." |
|
|
