Seychelles Police disperses unlawful SNP gathering at St Louis, Sunday 20th May
So on Sunday 20th May, the Police saw it fit to use tear gas to disperse a crowd of the political opposition in the lower St Louis (Biznak) area!!
In as much as the national daily “Nation” article of 22nd May on the subject indicated, the SNP supporters had unlawfully assembled in the area after a meeting in the Northwest district of Belombre.
They had ignored a call from the regular police sent over to request their dispersal, and manifested violent behaviour such as exploding ‘petar ton’ (a type of fireworks, more usually used to dislodge frozen tuna from the ice holds of purse seiners) fired metal bearings from catapults, etc; vis a vis the Police.
Inarguably the law of the land requires police authorisation for political assemblies!
Inarguably, when no such authorisation is applied for or granted, it is unlawful for anyone to cause or be party to a political assembly!
And inarguably, the Police has the mandate to stop such assemblies and disperse the crowd and arrest and bring charges against any person found to have participated in or caused the assembly!
This said, the Police must also be pragmatic, in the context of immediate bi-partisan post-election period.! In these instances, people are prone to assemble without any particular design or purpose. Experience has shown that individuals often come out of their homes to be by the street to express their emotions, and inevitably bunch up with others they find doing the same! In as much as these individuals are shouting, singing and otherwise peacefully (if raucously) expressing themselves, wisdom suggests that they are left alone to gradually and peacefully disperse, but that the Police monitors the situation closely and remain discreet and alert to intervene in the event that the crowd oversteps the ill-defined threshold from peaceful gathering to violent demonstration.
In the bi-partisan context where one political side rightly or wrongly identifies the Police with the other side, I hold the view that the Police would do best for its presence at the site of an assembly (legal or not) to be discreet and to exercise restraint in any intervention it deems fit to undertake!
Indeed, individuals within a crowd who may be prone to have anti-Police feelings would be quick to precipitate a surge of increasingly violent reactions to Police presence in proximity to their gathering!
The Police will always have the law on its side! It will, however, be ignoring the duality of its presence at a political gathering which requires it to disperse the crowd and is at the same time antagonising to the crowd it seeks to disperse. It does have the credo to 'serve without favour, ...or ill-will'
It would be naive to try and lay the burden of violent crowd reaction on the shoulders of the police. Just as it would be to say that the Police was not over-zealous in seeking to intervene in a situation, which would have probably been best served if left alone!
In the specific instance reported by the Nation article, there was no mention of any violent or aggressive nature of the assembled crowd at Biznak prior to Police intervention. In intervening therefore, the Police seemed to have precipitated the violent reaction of the crowd and thus giving itself stronger cause to forcefully cause the dispersal (of the crowd)
While I cannot entirely dispute the right of the police to intervene to require respect of the law, I also hold the view that in instances of bi-partisan politics, an over-zealous Police intervention does more than uphold the law. While it seeks to show its zero tolerance for non – respect of the law , it also
a) causes the crowd to cross the fragile threshold from peaceful (however unlawful) gathering to violent behaviour
b) seems to seek reinforcing the view in the overall public awareness, that supporters of political opposition are prone to violence and non-respect of the law
c) by virtue of the above, suggests that the SNP advocates violence and civil disturbances.
d) Re-inforces the political opposition’s view of the police having taken sides against them
1 commentaire:
I somewhat agree. I won't make specific comments about this issue as I was not there when it occured so I cannot tell if the police reacted in a right way or not. It all depends of what the SNP supporters were doing. And everybody has their own version of the story, difficult of knowing where is the truth.
Also the "unlawfull assembly" thingie makes us look a bit like one of these dictatorial countries living in a constant state of emmergency. Any assembly organized by a group (trade union, political party,...) should require an authorization of the police (so that they know the event is happening and can take the necessary measures like blocking roads). But any spontaneous assembly (like the one you are talking of if I understand things correctly) should not require any authorization. Although it has to be monitored to make sure it does not cause any trouble to public order.
Enregistrer un commentaire