Airport protesters found guilty but vow to fight on
Article published: Wednesday, December 8th 2010
Two climate protesters who blockaded the road entrance to the World Freight Centre of Manchester Airport were found guilty yesterday of obstruction of the highway.
The two defendants, Mark Haworth and Amanda Walters, had pleaded not guilty to the charges on the grounds that the expansion of the Airport would have significant impacts on local homes and globally in contributing to climate change. The court heard how the defendants had tried other means of redress prior to the protest action in May 2010 but that these methods had not been effective as of yet in halting the expansion.
Speaking after the case, defendant Mark Haworth said, “The battle against airport expansion at Heathrow, Stansted and Gatwick was won because ordinary people came together, joined forces and took on the aviation industry. We’ve linked up with residents in Manchester and Heathrow and we’ll continue to challenge Manchester Airport’s expansion plans.”
Fellow defendant Amanda Walters said, “The judge accepted that our concerns were legitimate and that other means of making our views heard had been tried. While the council continues to impose expansion of the airport onto local people, we will continue to oppose it.”
A large part of the defence case focused on the ‘reasonableness’ of the action given that other methods of redress had been explored. The witness statements of Lib Dem councillor Martin Eakins and Hasty Lane resident Peter Johnson was read out verbatim by the Defence Counsel Richard Thomas.
Hasty Lane residents Peter Johnson, Jon Smart and Holly Johnson with defendants Amanda Walters and Mark Haworth before the trial
In his statement, Eakins described his close invlovement in the campaign to Save Hasty Lane, including making official representations to the Wythenshawe Area Committee, petitions and letters to national government; “I feel that all democratic avenues were exhausted and I think it is reasonable to say that the only way avenue to achieve carbon reductions through traditional politics in this case was closed.”
In Peter Johnson’s written statement, he described his efforts to prevent his family home from being demolished, “We are now in a position where help and support from other areas in continuing to oppose the decision means that another route must be used if we are to halt this and/or further expansion already proposed or identified by the airport.”
Commenting on the verdict, Johnson said, “I’m disappointed for the individuals who went above and beyond the call of duty – for a cause we should all be worried about. This isn’t just a matter of concern for those of us living at Hasty Lane – the expansion of the Airport will have effects on the whole of Manchester, and the world too. Sadly, actions like these are seldom recognised as being right at the time, but the fight continues.”
Mark Haworth and Amanda Walters were given a fine of £175 an £250 respectively plus were ordered to pay £460 in costs each plus a £15 ‘victim surcharge’ each. On Monday, nine other defendants involved in the protest pleaded guilty and received fines and costs averaging around £340 each.
Peter Johnson, Holly Johnson and Cllr Martin Eakins at Hasty Lane - February 2010
In February 2010, residents at Sipson Village – which was earmarked for demolition if the previous government had pressed ahead with plans to add a third runway to Heathrow Airport – joined forces with Manchester campaigners in a ‘twinning’ ceremony, which joined Sipson with Hasty Lane, a row of houses near Manchester Airport currently set for demolition if expansion plans go ahead.
A public campaign titled ‘Manchester Airport on Trial’ is being run around the court trial and has received statements of support from local members of the public, local groups, academics, barristers, Independent journalist Johann Hari, and prominent national politicians such as Heathrow Labour MP John McDonnell, Green Party MP Caroline Lucas and Conservative Party MP Zac Goldsmith.
The trial of a second group who staged an airside blockade of a Monarach Airline jet at the same time as the roadside protest will commence in February 2011. Six defendants will plead not guilty to a charge of aggravated trespass.
More: Manchester, News
Comments
-
Both the police conduct – in not following the proper terms of the Public Order Act 1986 in relation to protest, as they demonstrably failed to set conditions on the activity before arresting the protestors – and the suffocating democratic deficit of local government in Manchester were revealed in their full nudity during the trial. The relevant Council Executive member repeatedly refused to meet with those campaigning against the second runway, while the City Planning Board decision which overruled the unanimous Wythenshawe Area Committee was voted along party lines. Perhaps most baffling issues remains how there cannot be seen to be a conflict of interest in how the City Council, who are majority shareholders of the Airport and therefore benefit directly from its profits, can make supposedly ‘independent’ decisions regarding its operational expansion.
Comment by Withingtonian on December 10, 2010 at 12:08 pm
The comments are closed.
