Stay classy Gardai - Mod Note in OP

I expect the guards are putting up with this sort of gobsh1tery day after day, so as much as I don't condone their over-reaction I wouldn't be too quick to judge them based on this. The guy obviously wanted to provoke them into a reaction, and the video is very much one-sided.

baltimore sun wrote: »

That's my question, are people actually allowed open the door? I know in other countries it's completely forbidden.

In other countries the police are armed. If he opened the door and they didn't like it in theory they could have dragged him out of the car but I don't think it would have come to that.

I think they just got heavy handed because of his silliness

It's very suss that he has a camera complete with sound at the ready before reaching the checkpoint.

If he couldn't hear them why did he think they could hear him saying the motor was broken ?
It's near the Shell to Sea so I imagine he is a protestor definitely more to the story than meets the eye

Here's a weird thing. The whole "going about my business" thing stuck in my head - I mean, who talks like that? But I dismissed it and went off on a different tack in response to a remark made on this thread about the powers of the Gardai to stop and search.

I found the answer to that question on the Irish Council For Civil Liberties site.

http://www.iccl.ie/know-your-rights-criminal-justice-and-garda-powers.html

If you open the 'Know Your Rights Criminal Justice and Garda Powers' PDF on that page, it states "A garda can ask you to stop at any time. In some circumstances, the Gardai can require you to stop if, for example: he or she suspects you are committing an offence under the Offences Against The State Acts or you are driving a vehicle and, for example, he or she wishes to check its tax and insurance details."

The short answer to "Do they have a legal right to detain any driver of a vehicle and check your details?" is, yes they do and you're required by law to comply. Not responding or refusing is illegal and opens you to arrest. But that's not the weird bit.

Searching another site, Indymedia, on the same subject, I came across this article from a writer/activist called Niall Harnett:

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/82108

What's weird is halfway down the page about how to deal with gardai if you're stopped, Harnett says "...you do not have to engage or cooperate with him in any way. He must invoke the law to use the law ... in accordance with the law! If he refuses, he is not acting in accordance with any law and you should invoke your rights to personal liberty and go about your business."

What are the odds of someone using the same obscure clunky phrase in relation to exactly the same (fairly rare in most people's lives) situation? So I decided to google "Niall Harnett". The second 't' was barely off my finger when Google helpfully started autocompleting. The first suggested autocomplete? "Niall Harnett Shell to Sea". Harnett, it appears, did 6 months for assault on a garda in relation to the campaign.

Slowly the pennies started to drop. Harnett has presumably coached other activists as to their rights, which he's entitled to do. You could hazard a guess that his advice includes minimal cooperation and responses, including responding to the question "What are doing/where are you going?" with "I am going about my business." Which would explain the odd circumlocution of the man in the video.

It also explains the gardai response. The guards in the YouTube video are there specifically to stop activism (and possibly criminal damage) from Shell to Sea activists. They meet a guy who fails to comply with their requests (and Harnett's advice on the subject is in direct contradiction with that from the Irish Council for Civil Liberties) and then uses a weird formulation of a reply - "I am going about my business" - that they will only have heard before from Shell To Sea activists.

At this point, the gardai are fairly sure that they are dealing with an activist from the very group that they're there to protect the facility from. Now that's not to say that their response is proportionate or correct, but it does explain why they're on edge.

The guards knew from his rote activist response which group he was from - I've no doubt they've heard it before - and since legally they're not only entitled to stop him but also arrest him for non-compliance to garda requests, they then are faced with do we wait it out or get him out of the car before he does damage. Bear in mind that, from their perspective, Shell To Sea activists have already done time for assault on gardai.

I'm filing the YT video under 'colossally disingenuous'.

Stark wrote: »

The advice given on Indymedia isn't much better than the likes of "A Garda can't arrest you if he's not wearing his hat" most of the time.

I was cuffed by a Garda once and she was only wearing her hat.

Good times.

Boombastic wrote: »

Gardai specifically there to stop activism?

What? Activism isn't against the law. Peaceful protests are allowed, the last time I checked.

I am aware of that, which is why I put in brackets "and possibly criminal damage". Shell To Sea, whether you're sympathetic to their cause or not, have a sizable record of causing criminal damages, as well at least one assault on a garda.

If the Garda are anticipating peaceful protest and activism, then they will police according to those expectations - a largely passive role, confined to crowd control and traffic duties. If they are expecting activism that includes a high potential for criminal damage they will police in a markedly different manner.

In relation to S2S, they'd be forgiven for not knowing whether someone was going to unfurl a banner or take a hammer to a piece of Shell equipment.

One way of clarifying the intent of a protestor would be to see if they have about their vehicle a banner or a hammer. If the driver of a vehicle is unwilling to submit to such a search or interrogation then the guards have the right to arrest that person for further questioning. Even the Irish Council for Civil Liberties acknowledges this to be the case.

If I were to give (unasked for) advice to the S2S campaign it would not to skirt around the Shell facility spouting rote, identikit responses (I am going about my business to the coopers and the haberdashers, i'faith...) that sound as though they came out of the late nineteenth century. It kind of marks you out a tad.

On the other hand, subject to any specific court rulings or police powers regarding the Shell facility itself, while a protestor is legally required to provide a direct response to a direct question, he or she is quite entitled to say "I am here to peacefully protest against the construction and operation of the natural gas pipeline", open the boot to show any banners or placards and be allowed to proceed along their way and pursue their peaceful activism.

Activism is fine. Not responding to garda requests is illegal and opens you to an arrest. Not allowing garda to ascertain the nature of your intended activist actions is also obstruction and non-compliance and similarly can lead to your arrest.

But the YouTube uploader knew all this. Which is why he sought a confrontation and got it.

The guy failed to cooperate with them. You can take this on face value as we can't hear what the guards are saying.
Its a load of bull about the window. It doesn't block sound and sure the guy had three other windows to let down.
In this day and age failing to cooperate with the guards while behind the wheel will be meant with force.