Police Deals and Threats
How Should Nonviolent Activists Respond?

On 26-27 August 1994 I participated in a nonviolent action at Fort
Queenscliff which was well organised by the group Australian Humanitarian Aid
for Bougainville (AHAB).  During this action, two points which sometimes
arise at actions came up yet again: how should activists respond when police
offer them 'a deal' or attempt to intimidate them with threats?  At the Fort
Queenscliff action, the police deal was as follows: if activists cooperated
(by sitting in a marked area when directed) after climbing the fort wall,
they would not be arrested.  If they did not cooperate (and attempted to
complete the action), they would be arrested.  And the major police threat
was that if activists carried wooden crosses (to symbolise those killed in
the war on Bougainville) they would be charged with the serious criminal
offence of brandishing a lethal weapon.  AHAB, as it has done in such
circumstances in the past, rejected the deal and refused to be intimidated by
the threats.

In my opinion, an activist should participate in a nonviolent action only if
the following two conditions are fulfilled: the tactic is strategically
focused (that is, the action has been carefully planned to help achieve a
clearly defined strategic goal) and the activist's conscience impels them to
participate.  However, once the action has been decided upon and the decision
to participate has been made, it is a fundamental principle of nonviolence
that an activist should never attempt to escape the consequences of their
action.

This sometimes happens when activists misunderstand the purpose of police
liaison or are intimidated by police threats (including threats of physical
violence).  In essence, the purpose of police liaison is to inform the police
of the details of the action, to explain briefly why the action is taking
place and to explain the nonviolent discipline of the group.1  While it may
be quite proper to negotiate some details of the action (for example, in the
action at Fort Queenscliff, it was proper to negotiate where the fort wall
was climbed so that it was not damaged) and this will demonstrate the
willingness of activists to cooperate whenever possible, it is never
appropriate to negotiate any details of an action which will undermine its
strategic effectiveness, which will violate its nonviolent principles or
which will destroy its integrity (by, for example, negotiating - out of fear
- to minimise any adverse consequences for the activists).

Having described the action, explained its goal and given an undertaking to
be disciplined and nonviolent, it is then the responsibility of activists to
let the police decide their response.  They may decide to detain and release
the activists, to arrest them or to assault them. To even suggest to the
police what their course of action should be is quite inappropriate.  This is
because an important feature of any nonviolent action is its power to build
new human relationships which help to bring a nonviolent world into being. 
This requires, among other things, that each individual feels morally
autonomous: free to choose what is right for them and the world. 
Consequently, the police must be left to respond as their conscience demands:
will they arrest (or assault) the activists as they feel their (police) duty
requires or will they act otherwise as their (personal) conscience dictates? 
What they decide (in the short term) is largely immaterial; what matters is
that they are compelled to deliberate and to choose.  By acting in this way,
and accepting the consequences, activists are reinforcing (rather than
subverting) the moral autonomy of each individual.

If arrested, activists are often confronted with the choice of whether or not
to accept bail conditions.  I believe that this possibility should be
carefully considered and the response largely decided before the action.  In
some actions, resisting bail conditions and going to jail is the most
politically effective course of action. In any case, while there are several
variables (including the personal ones) to consider, it is still important
not to violate the integrity of the action.

If a bail condition is consistent with the action plan (for example,
activists had decided to enter a prohibited area only once on a certain day
and the bail condition stipulates nothing more than that the activist will
not return to the immediate vicinity of the action during the rest of that
day), then accepting (and signing) the bail condition would be reasonable. 
If, however, a bail condition is onerous or may interfere with future (known
or unknown) plans, then it should not be accepted.  This is because signing a
bail condition in these circumstances (whatever the reason) impinges on the
freedom to participate in future political activity and such curtailment of
freedom should be vigorously resisted.

In summary, once an action has been decided and the police have been
informed, each activist should then search their own conscience in order to
decide the nature of their participation.  If the action involves the risk of
arrest and they are not ready to be arrested or to resist inappropriate bail
conditions should they be applied, then they should perform one of the other
vital functions (such as arrest support) at the action.  Similarly, if their
conscience does not give them clear guidance, my experience suggests that
they are not ready for the action and should play some other role on the day.
If, alternatively, and despite any unresolved fears, the conscience of an
activist impels them to participate, they must be willing to accept all of
the consequences of their action (including arrest and resisting bail
conditions if necessary).  Either of these courses of action - providing
support or risking arrest - is a powerful political act as long as all of its
consequences are accepted.
Robert J Burrowes

References
1. For a fuller description of why and how police liaison should be
undertaken, see R.J. Burrowes. 'Nonviolent Activism and [the] Police'.
Nonviolence Today #37, March/April 1994. pp. 10-12.