Prosecutors have dropped more than 100 cases against UK Uncut activists who staged a sit-in at Fortnum & Mason almost four months ago in protest over the company’s alleged tax evasion.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has thrown out all 109 charges of aggravated trespass that were under review, leaving just 30 of the original 146 protesters arrested for occupying the central London department store on 26 March to face court on 9 November this year. The CPS said yesterday it was not in the public interest to pursue the case against the majority of the anti-cuts campaigners.
Police arrested 146 activists and detained them for up to 24 hours after they stormed Fortnum & Mason during the TUC anti-cuts rally. Two cases were dropped and five minors aged between 15 and 17 had their charges thrown out earlier this month. If convicted, the remaining activists face a maximum three-month prison sentence.
Alison Saunders, Chief Crown Prosecutor of CPS London, said: “I have decided that the cases against 109 individuals who were charged after protesting in Fortnum and Mason on 26 March should be discontinued. However, we will continue to pursue the other 30 cases through the judicial process.”
Ms Saunders added that there was “sufficient evidence” to provide a realistic prospect of conviction for the offence of aggravated trespass against all defendants, but decided that a prosecution was not in the public interest because the sit-in had been a single incident, protesters had not been involved in similar offences before, they had played only a “minor role in the offending behaviour” and even if convicted the court would be likely only to impose a “nominal penalty.”
Mike Schwarz, a solicitor for Bindmans – the law firm representing about 110 of the UK Uncut protesters – said he thought it was “irrational” to drop cases against so many of the defendants but continue to prosecute 30 of the protesters, who were selected if they had banners, large quantities of leaflets, or if they had been involved in similar protests previously.
Daniel Garvin, a 26-year-old charity worker who was arrested and detained for 22 hours in Fulham police station after the occupation, said he was “relieved” to have his charges dropped but thought all of the cases should be thrown out. “If it’s not in the public interest to prosecute me, why is it in the public interest to prosecute another 30 simply because they had leaflets in their bags? It’s ridiculous.”
Supporters rallied round UK Uncut after a video emerged of chief inspector Claire Clark telling the group inside Fortnum & Mason that they had been “non-violent” and “sensible” minutes before the protesters were individually arrested outside.
The Independent has learnt that Ms Clark has confirmed in writing that she knew that all protesters would be arrested upon leaving the department store, but chose not to tell them to avoid a potential breach of the peace. She also said that she did not think everyone inside Fortnum & Mason had been involved in criminal activity. The Met has refused to comment on the case.
Raj Chada, a solicitor at Hodge Jones & Allen, who represents 6 of the defendants still facing trial, said lawyers would be mounting an “abuse of process” defense at the first court date, asking for the remaining cases to be thrown out of court. “This was clearly a political act of policing, rather than public order policing. The inspector deliberately deceived those present at the protest – they had a legitimate expectation that they would be dealt with in one way and then they weren’t,” he said.
Labour MP John McDonnell, who signed an early day motion congratulating UK Uncut last year, said: “It is blindingly obvious that hauling the UK Uncut protestors before the courts is not only a complete waste of court time and resources but serves no purpose but to undermine the right to protest. All the cases should now be dropped.”
Adam Ramsay, 25, one of the 30 defendants who faces court in November, said: “I am happy so many people got off, but it seems completely arbitrary and farcical that they decided that they are going to prosecute me and not other people when there is no difference at all in what we did and didn’t do. It’s frustrating.”
A shorter version of this article appeared here at The Independent.
