On Monday 25th October, six Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) campaigners were sentenced to a total of almost 18 years by Judge Cutler at Winchester Crown Court. The six had all entered guilty pleas, not trusting that they would receive a fair trial considering the media storm accompanying the case. pleas were either for conspiracy to blackmail or conspiracy to interfere with the contractual relations of an animal testing laboratory (or SOCPA 145).
Section 145 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA 145) was part of a raft of anti-protest legislation brought in by New Labour targeting the animal rights movement. The new laws were a direct response to the success animal rights campaigners had had in targeting companies with links to vivisection. SOCPA 145 was designed specifically to deal with the 'SHAC model' of campaigning; targeted dissent against the network of customers, service providers and investors supporting a corporation, in this case Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS). The blackmail charges are part of an attempt, spearheaded by the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit (NETCU), to broaden the existing blackmail law's application to direct action camapaigners (see here and here). This is the second set of political convictions; the first round in 2009 seeing seven people get a total of 50 years, with a maximum sentence of 11 years. SHAC has been the target of a campaign by police agencies to incrementally criminalise animal rights campaigners and obtain exemplary sentences. It is clear that a small group of individuals are being punished for the success of the growing movement against profit from animal cruelty. Five of the campaigners received Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) of up to ten years. In the first SHAC trial campaigners had received life-long ASBOs preventing them from protesting against vivisection. These banning orders, prescripting particular political activity, were the first of their kind in the UK. SHAC does not recognise HLS as a lawful company, because the company has a proven track record of criminal history and animal cruelty, for example with Channel 4 filming HLS workers punching puppies in the face and performing experiments on them whilst intoxicated. HLS is Europe’s largest animal research laboratory, killing around 500 animals every day. Press reports released after the sentencing accuse the defendants of sending letters accusing people working for companies with links to HLS of paedophilia, posting threats and used tampons to company employees and using hoax, and even real, bombs (see here for example. However, the most sensational actions which were reported in the press were never convincingly linked to any of the defendants. The crux of the case was that all of the defendants were linked, to varying degrees, to the SHAC campaign, and that unlawful actions had been carried out in line with the campaign's aims. These sentences are politically motivated and have implications for all anti-corporate campaigners. In 2009, Corporate Watch produced a briefing, 'State Crackdown on Anti Corporate Dissent: The Animal Rights Movement' that explains how animal rights activists have been used as a test case for repression which we can expect to be rolled out agains a wide range of campaigners. There have been solidarity demos throughout the UK and beyond. In October staff at Fortress Investment Group, Nomura, JP Morgan and Bank of America in London were all leafleted, while a noise demo was held with banners, placards and megaphones. Fortress Investment Group gave a crucial $70 million loan to HLS. Nomura, JP Morgan and Bank of America are major shareholders in the company. After the verdicts, Militant Forces Against Huntingdon (MFAH) staged three arson attacks against the homes of directors of Nomura.
Section 145 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (SOCPA 145) was part of a raft of anti-protest legislation brought in by New Labour targeting the animal rights movement. The new laws were a direct response to the success animal rights campaigners had had in targeting companies with links to vivisection. SOCPA 145 was designed specifically to deal with the 'SHAC model' of campaigning; targeted dissent against the network of customers, service providers and investors supporting a corporation, in this case Huntingdon Life Sciences (HLS). The blackmail charges are part of an attempt, spearheaded by the National Extremism Tactical Coordination Unit (NETCU), to broaden the existing blackmail law's application to direct action camapaigners (see here and here). This is the second set of political convictions; the first round in 2009 seeing seven people get a total of 50 years, with a maximum sentence of 11 years. SHAC has been the target of a campaign by police agencies to incrementally criminalise animal rights campaigners and obtain exemplary sentences. It is clear that a small group of individuals are being punished for the success of the growing movement against profit from animal cruelty. Five of the campaigners received Anti Social Behaviour Orders (ASBOs) of up to ten years. In the first SHAC trial campaigners had received life-long ASBOs preventing them from protesting against vivisection. These banning orders, prescripting particular political activity, were the first of their kind in the UK. SHAC does not recognise HLS as a lawful company, because the company has a proven track record of criminal history and animal cruelty, for example with Channel 4 filming HLS workers punching puppies in the face and performing experiments on them whilst intoxicated. HLS is Europe’s largest animal research laboratory, killing around 500 animals every day. Press reports released after the sentencing accuse the defendants of sending letters accusing people working for companies with links to HLS of paedophilia, posting threats and used tampons to company employees and using hoax, and even real, bombs (see here for example. However, the most sensational actions which were reported in the press were never convincingly linked to any of the defendants. The crux of the case was that all of the defendants were linked, to varying degrees, to the SHAC campaign, and that unlawful actions had been carried out in line with the campaign's aims. These sentences are politically motivated and have implications for all anti-corporate campaigners. In 2009, Corporate Watch produced a briefing, 'State Crackdown on Anti Corporate Dissent: The Animal Rights Movement' that explains how animal rights activists have been used as a test case for repression which we can expect to be rolled out agains a wide range of campaigners. There have been solidarity demos throughout the UK and beyond. In October staff at Fortress Investment Group, Nomura, JP Morgan and Bank of America in London were all leafleted, while a noise demo was held with banners, placards and megaphones. Fortress Investment Group gave a crucial $70 million loan to HLS. Nomura, JP Morgan and Bank of America are major shareholders in the company. After the verdicts, Militant Forces Against Huntingdon (MFAH) staged three arson attacks against the homes of directors of Nomura.