2011-04-29
Montreal activist sentence to prison for talking during G20
By Ben Spurr
The crown prosecutor made no bones about his desire to make an example out of G20 activist Jaggi Singh at his sentencing hearing Thursday.
In fact, that was prosecutor Jason Miller’s main argument as he asked the judge to give Singh six months in prison for doing little else than calling for the G20 security fence to be torn down.
Singh, one of Canada’s most prominent anti-globalization activists and a member of migrants’ rights group No One Is Illegal, was in an Old City Hall courtroom to plead guilty to counseling to commit mischief over $5,000, a charge brought against him as a result of statements and internet posts he made in the days leading up to the chaotic summit last June.
Miller is asking Justice Robert Bigelow to not only sentence Singh to six months in prison, but requesting that the possibility of a conditional sentence be taken off the table, meaning he would serve the entire term behind bars.
Singh’s case has raised real concerns that the Crown is attempting to criminalize dissent and interfere with free expression. The crux of the Crown’s case against him is a speech he made about the G20 security, whereupon he offered his opinion on the barrier that kept protesters from delivering their message to world leaders.
In a Youtube video dated June 24, Singh told a group of reporters, “There are fences like this all over the world that are responsible for a global apartheid, where on the one side you have the global elite … and then you have others, who survive everyday, who have to deal with the police state.”
He went on to say, “I think the fence deserves to be taken down, and I hope people do organize to do so. Whether we can in the context of this police operation remains to be seen. But I do think we need to reestablish parameters of things here and this [fence] is completely illegitimate and deserves to be taken down. I commend anyone who tries to do it.”
When asked by a reporter who he thought should take the fence down, Singh replied, “You should.”
This is the basis for the crown’s charge of counselling to commit mischief over $5000. Miller told Justice Bigelow, “it’s clear from the evidence that Mr. Singh was aware there were a number of violent individuals” at the summit. “Mr. Singh can be under no illusions that anyone who attempted to do what he had counseled would be engaged by police … and that confrontation would be violent.”
Miller admitted that there was no sentence harsh enough to make Singh change his political beliefs, but instead the court needed to send a message to other activists. He spoke repeatedly about the importance of “deterrent sentencing” and said, “There is clearly a community that looks up to Mr. Singh and feels the rule of law is unimportant.”
Miller is arguing that Singh, a lifelong activist, must be kept separate from the community that shares his anti-globalization views during the entirety of his sentence, and as part of the sentencing ruling Miller wants a no-contact order placed on Singh and the 17 other people still on trial for alleged crimes at the G20. Justice Bigelow will deliver his sentence on June 21.
As Singh sat quietly in jeans and a hooded black sweatshirt Thursday, his defence lawyer Peter Rosenthal argued that the Crown was attempting to hold him responsible for the actions of those who rioted at the G20, people who would have committed crimes with or without Singh’s encouragement. “He’s willing to take responsibility for what he did do,” said Rosenthal. “The Crown is asking you to punish him for things other people did.”
The defence presented 276 letters of support from individuals and organizations in Canada and around the world that expressed their belief that the G20 fence represented an affront to the public’s right to protest and that Singh had done nothing wrong.
The letters held no weight for Miller, who said that they were inappropriate, especially because there were so many of them. That provoked loud, sarcastic laughter from the gallery, which was packed with dozens of Singh’s supporters.
In exchange for Singh’s guilty plea, the Crown is dropping criminal conspiracy charges against him. Also part of the agreement is a guarantee Singh will not be used as a witness in other G20-related cases, he will not have to offer an apology, and the full terms of his plea deal will be made public.
This is not the first time Singh has found himself before a judge. He was arrested at the Quebec City Summit of the Americas in 2000, and in 1997 his unlawful arrest before the Apec summit in Vancouver was part of a security fiasco that led to a major review of RCMP practices.
Ironically, it was that review that security forces used in the planning stages for last year’s G20 summit. Police conduct over that weekend was so poor it led to at least one police officer being charged with assault, the largest (and ultimately baseless) mass arrest in Canadian history, and widespread calls for a public inquiry into police practices.