In 1972 Ricky Tomlinson the well known UK comedian and actor was a qualified plasterer and builder working on the new Wrexham bypass in North Wales, he became involved in union activities to improve the poor working conditions and pay of workers in the construction industry. Following a series of rare construction industry strikes (held peacefully amid amicable encounters with police) he and other Union members were arrested in a climate of judicial secrecy and ad hoc process. Lacking any real evidence, Ricky and fellow union members were imprisoned following a conviction under the archaic 1875 Conspiracy Act and he spent the next two years in a variety of prisons, including a substantial period in Shrewsbury prison. He later found he had been secretly classed as a political prisoner. During his imprisonment Ricky went on hunger strike and endured other privations to impress his innocent status and this status was often openly recognised as such by prison guards and even a prison governor. One of Ricky’s fellows was made extremely ill by their ordeal and died tragically some time later, it is on behalf of his fellow union members that Ricky has campaigned on this issue for many years. Documents relating to the trial and judicial process concerning Ricky and other union members were classified as top secret and this status has been extended to 2021. Ricky is campaigning for wider awareness of this travesty of justice for the “Shrewsbury 24″, for release of improperly classified documentation concerning the case and to clear his name of this criminal conviction for the sake of his family who have also been adversely affected by this episode. Please see the following government e-petition demanding the release of government documents relating to the trial: http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/35394  this petition has been subject to a declaration of some 50,000 invalid entries by the UK government. Ricky’s campaign is appealing for fully completed signatures on the petition to ensure this reaches 100,000 – the number needed to trigger a debate on this topic in the UK Government House of Commons, the deadline for the petition is 27 June 2013.

Please also see the following resources -

• The official Shrewsbury 24 campaign site
• Billy Bragg backs Ricky Tomlinson’s call over the Shrewsbury 24
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2000/newsmakers/1569062.stm
• http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jan/22/truth-about-shrewsbury-24-strike

Rick Tomlinson describes his Shrewsbury 24 experiences (Youtube):

Personal Appeal from Ricky Tomlinson Ricky Tomlinson writes to Labour movement supporters to ask they sign the Downing Street petition on an historic injustice in the construction industry

“You know me as an actor and performer today but as a young man I was a plasterer working in the building industry and a member of the T&GWU. We were low paid and had some of the worst working conditions of any workers in Britain in the 1970’s. Like any good trade unionists we decided we would take action to change this. We had a national strike in summer 1972. We picketed sites that were not well organised and where union members needed our support. Five months after the strike ended 24 of us were arrested out of the blue and six of us were sent to prison after lengthy trails at Shrewsbury Crown Court.

I was sent to jail for 2 years for carrying out trade union activities. Today you do not hear of trade unionists in Britain being sent to prison but that’s what happened to me and 5 of my colleagues. Others got suspended prison sentences.

Please sign my e-petition to demand the release of Government documents. We believe that they show that there was government interference and manipulation in bringing the prosecutions. The Coalition Government today continues to refuse to release these documents on grounds of “national security”. “

In view of this tragedy, a debate about the restrictions imposed by the US
on Cuban residents to visit and send supplies and money to their families in
Cuba has begun. Cuba has requested authorization to buy materials from
the US to repair homes and power lines. In addition, Cuba has requested
that US companies receive authorization to extend commercial credits to
the island to buy food. The Bush Administration’s reply has been a
ridiculous offer of aid while ratifying their policy of political and economic blockade, even more cruel and immoral under the present circumstances.

We are sending an appeal to artists and intellectuals around the world to
demand an immediate end to the criminal US blockade and to promote
solidarity and support of our country.

To Sign up: http://www.concubahoy.cult.cu

Email: concubahoy@uneac.co.cu concubahoy@cubarte.cult.cu

ISC calls for this decision to be rescinded, & will be putting the following motion to the next CILIP agm:-

This agm affirms it commitment to the most fundamental of human rights – the right to life.

This body condemns the arms trade, & all its relate industries as being responsible for the negation of this most fundamental human right.

We view the recent inclusion of The Aerospace and Defence Librarians Group (ADLG) as a Special Interest Group with CILIP to be in opposition to this most fundamental of human rights.

We therefore call for the withdrawal of The Aerospace and Defence Librarians Group (ADLG) as a special Interest Group within CILIP.

&

Directs that CILIP should affiliate itself with the Campaign Against The Arms Trade ( CAAT ).

A motion to this effect will be presented to the next CILIP AGM.

ALA Council

Resolution on the Crisis in Kenya

January 2008

WHEREAS, hundreds of people have been killed and injured, and thousands have been displaced by the current violence in Kenya generated by the controversy surrounding the December election results;

WHEREAS, the Kenyan government has recently curtailed freedom of the press and broadcasting and the right to assemble and demonstrate peacefully and non-violently;

WHEREAS, the American Library Association has endorsed Article 19 of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights (policy 58.4) which covers freedom of the press and freedom of expression – rights which the Kenyan government is now denying its citizens;

WHEREAS, the American Library Association opposes any governmental prerogatives that lead to the intimidation of individuals or groups and encourages resistance to such abuse of governmental power (Policy 53.4);

WHEREAS, the American Library Association recognizes the vital importance of free and open elections;

WHEREAS, the Association of Concerned Africa Scholars has issued a call for an end to (1) the widespread violence by the principal Kenyan political actors, (2) restrictions of the right to assemble and demonstrate peacefully and non-violently, and (3) recently declared restrictions on press freedoms;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Library Association calls for an end to the violence in Kenya, a return to press and broadcasting freedom, and the right to peacefully assemble for the people of Kenya.

‘Views sought on controversial stock in libraries guidance’ (1)

‘Smith seeking to close websites that promote jihad’ (2)

‘Lecturers warn against college “spy” rules’ (3)

By John Pateman

A common theme runs through these recent news headlines – the Government wants to recruit librarians, internet site providers, students and lecturers in its ‘War Against Terror’.

The Museums, Libraries and Archives Council (MLA) has launched a new consultation on managing ‘controversial stock’ in libraries. This follows from the Prime Minister’s national security statement to Parliament in November 2007. The MLA was commissioned to produce guidance for public libraries on the management of ‘extremist and inflammatory material’.

The first principles of the draft guidance are that ‘Free expression and open libraries remain essential to British democracy’; and ‘Libraries operate within the law to provide free access to a diversity of information, opinion and ideas in a neutral and hospitable environment.’

The problem is that stock selection is now subject to a range of laws, some of which are contradictory. The guidance seems to suggest that individual librarians should use their personal judgement in deciding which law to apply. One consequence of this could be that librarians become risk averse and decide not to stock books which can be regarded as ‘controversial, extremist or inflammatory’.

There is a precedent for this which the guidance does not mention, and that was the disastrous effect on stock selection of Clause 28 which made it an offense to ‘promote homosexuality’. As a result many library authorities refused to stock the Pink Paper or gay books and this policy and practice remained in place long after Clause 28 was repealed.

For many years the primary legislation relating to public libraries was the Public Libraries and Museums Act 1964 which puts a duty on local authorities ‘to meet the general requirements and any special requirements of adults and children.’ As the guidance points out, these duties may present ‘problems for libraries located in areas that contain a high proportion of residents with radical beliefs.’

However, the Public Library Act has now been qualified by the Terrorism Act 2006 which defines a ‘terrorist publication’ as one that is likely ‘to be understood by some or all of the actual or potential recipients as a direct or indirect encouragement or inducement to commit, prepare or instigate terrorist acts’. Contents that are likely to indirectly encourage terrorism include any matter ‘which glorifies the commission or preparation (whether in the past, future or generally) of acts of terrorism.’

A librarian could be found guilty of providing access to this material if it was proved that they did so as the result of both a ‘guilty act’ (such as loaning the material) and a ‘guilty mind’ (the intention to encourage or induce an act of terrorism). The sentence for this offence is imprisonment for a maximum of 7 years.

A librarian could also be found guilty of the offence of ‘encouragement to terrorism’ but this is less likely because the defence of innocent dissemination is wider. The maximum sentence for this offence is also 7 years.

Section 3 of the Terrorism Act applies to providing internet access and a librarian must comply with any section 3 ‘notice’. The notice is a ‘declaration by a police constable that the statement, article or record is unlawfully terrorism related.’ When the notice is issued the librarian must, within 2 working days, stop making the matter available to the public (for example, by blocking an offending website).

Section 58 of the Terrorism Act makes it an offence to ‘collect or make a record of information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’. The librarian has a defence if he can prove that he has a ‘reasonable excuse’ for his action or possession. The maximum sentence for this offence is 10 years imprisonment.

The MLA advises that ‘Librarians and library authorities should take pre-emptive precautions to ensure that information that is likely to be useful to “terrorists” is not stocked.’ This is a green light for the culling of any material which might pose a potential risk. This could include classics such a Seven Pillars of Wisdom by T.E. Lawrence and Guerrilla Warfare by Che Guevara. The MLA guidance is that ‘historical accounts that could be interpreted as glorifying terrorism may be stocked if there is little to no possibility that a current reader would try and emulate the acts described.’ However, there is evidence that the works of Lawrence and Guevara are being used by combatants in Iraq and so they could fall foul of the Terrorism Act. And presumably any novels which contain detailed descriptions of ‘terrorist’ activities should be removed from library shelves as well.

Another important piece of legislation which has been qualified by the Terrorism Act is the Race Relations Act 1976 and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. Sections of these Acts indicate that by banning certain ‘extremist’ publications from libraries, Librarians and library authorities could be behaving in a racially discriminatory manner and / or operating a racially discriminatory practice. However, there is a critical overriding ‘disclaimer’ with regard to ‘safeguarding national security.’

The MLA guidance is that ‘Librarians and library authorities should not be unduly concerned with the provisions of race relations legislation, and focus on avoidance of commission of the offences created by the Terrorism Act.’ This is a particularly worrying element of the guidance because Librarians are effectively being asked to disregard the Race Relations Act to avoid falling foul of the Terrorism Act. In this respect the guidance does not achieve its aim of helping to promote community cohesion through the provision of a balanced range of information, learning and cultural resources.

The Public Order Act 1986 creates a number of offences in relation to conduct intended to stir up racial and religious hatred. This includes the display, distribution or possession of ‘threatening, abusive or insulting’ material if ‘racial hatred would be likely to be stirred up’. The stocking of ‘extremist’ literature within a library suggests that Librarians could be susceptible to this crime although there is a defence of innocent dissemination. The maximum penalty is 7 years imprisonment.

The MLA advice is that ‘Librarians and library authorities would be wise to take pre-emptive precautions to avoid having to rely on a defence.’ Once again the MLA is advising librarians to be cautious and risk averse and to remove from their shelves any materials which could fall into this category. This seems to be contrary to the first principles of the guidance that ‘Libraries operate within the law to provide free access to a diversity of information, opinion and ideas in a neutral and hospitable environment.’ In this regard the guidance does not help libraries to fulfil their role as access points to publicly available information.

Library authorities have an obligation to carry out their duties in accordance with the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998. Article 10 (1) of this Act states that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.’ Article 10 (2) qualifies this right by making it subject to a number of competing interests such as national security.

Once again, the MLA guidance urges caution and advises Librarians to comply with the Terrorism Act rather than the Human Rights Act. The guidance is that ‘A library itself is not under a duty to guarantee the expression of all ideas for all people.’ This appears to contradict the first principles of the guidance that ‘Free expression and open libraries remain essential to British democracy’.

If a publication contains references to ‘extremist’ beliefs, then excluding or banning it may be an offence under the European Convention on Human Rights which includes the right to ‘manifest’ one’s religion or belief. However, as with Article 10 this freedom is not absolute and can be qualified on a number of grounds, including compliance with the Terrorism Act.

The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 requires local authorities to involve ‘local persons’ in the exercise of a particular function (such as stock selection) if it ‘considers it appropriate’ to do so. If local people are involved in stock selection the MLA guidance is that ‘it will depend on the circumstances of the particular case as to whether the legislation will apply to the particular individual or organisation.’ This statement is not equivocal or clear and further guidance or clarification is needed.

Overall the MLA guidance does not achieve its aim of meeting the needs of library managers and staff in the selection, presentation and promotion of material in the context of wider stock policy. It is far too cautious and risk averse and will have the effect of controlling and restricting the selection of stock that can be interpreted as ‘controversial’, ‘extremist’ or ‘inflammatory’. It is not possible to agree a common definition of these terms in the same way that ‘Obscenity’ could not be defined within the Obscene Publications Act, which has consequently fallen into disuse.

As well as posing a threat to stock selection, this guidance also challenges the professional ethics of the librarian. Rather than becoming an agent of the state’s security apparatus librarians, of all people, should be standing up for freedom of information and freedom of expression. The response of librarians to this guidance should be the same as that of students and lecturers who have warned that new government guidelines on tackling Muslim ‘extremism’ in universities must not become a ‘snoopers’ charter.’ And instead of culling our book stocks and censuring the internet we should be supporting the views of Mark Littlewood of Progressive Vision who commented that ‘The idea that terrorism can be thwarted by seeking to shut down extremist websites is absurd and dangerous.’

References

(1) Consultation on draft guidance on the management of controversial materials in public libraries, MLA, 2008

(2) ‘Smith seeking to close websites that promote jihad’, Daily Telegraph, 18 January 2008

(3) ‘Lecturers warn against college “spy” rules’, Morning Star, 23 January 2008

John Pateman

Information for Social Change

24 January 2008

Coinciding with the UN Climate Talks (MOP 3, COP 13) in Bali, Indonesia, from the 3rd to the 14th December 2007

See:

http://www.globalclimatecampaign.org/

http://www.lisjobnet.com/LisJobNet/Jobs/jobA0711-21.htm

We remember the many victims of the two regimes which went to war over these small islands.

We celebrate the efforts of all those who worked to prevent or end that pointless war.

We call for the people of both nations which were involved in this pointless conflict to work together so that such a pointless tragedy might never be repeated.

Edgardo Civallero – Argentina Martyn Lowe – London

Versión Española

In Mexico, Santiago Rafael Cruz, a 29-year-old union organizer from the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC, AFL-CIO) was brutally tortured and murdered. Santiago was a successful organizer in the USA who had moved down to Mexico to run the union’s office there. His activities aroused the hostility of those who fear the growth of trade unionism among farm workers, and generated attacks in the media, threats of deportation, robberies and intimidation, culminating in this terrible crime.
Santiago has a family in Mexico, a mother, father, sisters and brothers. But his family is much larger than that; it includes all of us. We must grieve together with his family, and we must fight together with them as one large family to ensure that the Mexican government investigates the murder, arrests and prosecutes those responsible, and ensures the safety of union activists in that country.
Please take a moment to send off your message today:
http://www.labourstart.org/cgi-bin/solidarityforever/show_campaign.cgi?c=232
About the same time that union-hating murderers were ending the life of this courageous young man in Mexico, on the other side of the world Iranian security forces lured union activist Mahmoud Salehi into the local prosecutor’s office on the pretext of discussing plans for this year’s May Day celebrations. Salehi, a former president of the bakery workers’ union in the city of Saqez, was then arrested and put in jail for a year with a three year suspended sentence on top of that. His crime was that in 2004 he organized a May Day demonstration.
Tell the Iranian authorities to release Mahmoud Salehi now, and to drop all charges. Send off your message by clicking here:
http://www.labourstart.org/cgi-bin/solidarityforever/show_campaign.cgi?c=231

Read More

The UK experienced a new Westminster Government in May 2010, including the Conservative Party and a junior coalition partner, the Liberal Democrat (LibDem) Party. These parties were elected on a platform to address the UK financial deficit (of around

15th October 2011 PRESS RELEASE

UNDERCOVER POLICE AGENT PUBLICLY OUTED AT CONFERENCE Campaigners today outed the most-senior-yet police spy responsible for infiltrating environmental and social justice campaigns.

Former Detective Inspector Bob Lambert MBE had just spoken at a ‘One Society, Many Cultures’ anti-racist conference on Saturday 15th October attended by 300 delegates at the Trades Union Congress HQ in Central London. He was then publicly challenged by 5 members of London Greenpeace who knew him at the time and who called on him to apologise for the undercover police infiltration of London Greenpeace, Reclaim The Streets and other campaign groups – an operation he took part in or supervised over two decades, whilst rising to the rank of Detective Inspector.

Bob ‘Robinson’ (as Bob Lambert called himself at the time) was a spy in London Greenpeace from 1984 to 1988, and he went on to supervise other agents who continued with infiltration of groups such as London Greenpeace and Reclaim the Streets, along with anti fascist protests, and actions against genetically modified crops. These agents used pseudonyms, and engaged in fraudulent and deceitful long-term intimate relationships with people in the groups before disappearing without trace – a stasi-like tactic involving a gross abuse of trust which has caused great emotional damage to a number of people involved.

As he left the venue Bob Lambert was followed along the street and was challenged again to apologise, but he briskly walked away refusing to talk.

‘By publicly exposing this latest scandal, campaigners have demonstrated that the recent police spies outed (such as Mark Kennedy / Mark Stone) were not ‘rogue officers’, but part of an unacceptable pattern of immoral infiltration of environmental groups, condoned at a high level. We demand action to ensure that the full truth is revealed and that justice is done.’ – Spokesperson, London Greenpeace

Note 1: The HMIC report on previously exposed police infiltration is due to be published in the coming week. Note 2: The full text from the leaflet distributed at the conference is below. Note 3: A copy of the complete leaflet, with photos, is available on Indymedia

see:http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2011/10//486878.odt>www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2011/10//486878.odt

The 2 photos in the leaflet from 1984 are copyright London Greenpeace; news outlets are free to use them with credit.

1. That links are created between the ISC and UNISON websites, including the use of suitable logos where appropriate and mutually agreed.

2. That ISC and UNISON promote each others activities via periodicals etc., including contributions from ISC members in UNISON literature, also that ISC will cover UNISON (and other trade union) activities which promote the Library and Information Sector and the interests of library and information workers.

3. That sponsorship possibilities are explored, for example to support article contributions from developing countries.

This Statement of Intent will be posted on the ISC website and will be used as a basis for discussion with UNISON, including Regional Officers and the International Officer.

ISC Editorial Board