Gotenburg 2001: i manifestanti di possono ottenere un rimborso per la loro detenzione illegale

["Luciano Dondero" <svludo at gmail.com>]

Un'informazione interessante nell'articolo in inglese di seguito (che è
tradotto dallo svedese):
i manifestanti di Gotenburg del 2001 possono ottenere un rimborso per  la
loro detenzione illegale.
Un precedente che si potrebbe usare anche qui, forse.
Luciano Dondero



Arbetaren, 11th of October, 2006:
400 can get damages after Gotheburg protests
Swedish version:
<http://www.arbetaren.se/articles/inrikes20061011>http://www.arbetaren.se/articles/inrikes20061011

The police had no right to trap activists at the demonstration on
Järntorget in Gothenburg 2001, says Office of the Chancellor of
Justice (JK).

Five years after the protests against the EU summit in Gothenburg, the
400 activists who were detained by the police on Järntorget get
justice. Ursula Egdius who reported the police after being assaulted
now gets damages after a decision from JK. The police were not allowed
to block the people at the demonstration from leaving.

On Saturday the 16th of June, 2001, hundreds of people gathered at
Järntorget in Gothenburg to protest the violence during the EU summit.
The demonstration was surrounded by police with shields, who deprived
the activists of their liberty.

-I was closest to the police ring. After about two hours, lines of
police came running.

19 year old Ursula Egdius had no possibility to move, but was trampled
down, fell over backwards and hit her head. She got scrape wounds, a
bump in the back of her head, and hurt her left knee.

The following Monday, Ursula Egdius made a report to the police.

This September, about five years after the EU summit, JK decided to
grant Ursula Egdius 1000 kronor [ie. $135, £70 or ¤110] in damages for
the police's actions on Järntorget.

The damages are about the deprivation of liberty, which means JK
thinks the police surrounding of the demo was unreasonable.

-My interpretation of the decision is that JK thinks the police
initially had the right to deprive all of their liberty, with support
from the Police law. But also that they did have enough time to decide
on the actions towards every singleindividual, which is a demand in
that law. Therefore, there were no legal grounds to block people like
Ursula Egdius from leaving. JK thinks the deprivation of her liberty
was incorrect in relation to the law on deprivation of liberty, and
that she therefore should be granted damages. This can mean that more
people have the right to receive damages. Both the ones who were on
Järntorget, and others in similar cases, says Sabina Sadi, human
[rights?] lawyer with a Stockholm law firm.

Katarina Berglund Siegbahn at JK makes a similar interpretation.

-The deprivation of liberty is deemed incorrect, and is therefore of a
type that one has the right to be granted damages for. It looks like
other people amongst the group who were put in the exact same
situation could also have the right to damages.

Ursula Egdius' report to the police, with a demand for damages, was
handed over to the JK.

-One can also send a report of damages directly to us. In that case,
we'll obtain the opinion of the National Police Board. Generally
speaking, the barring of time for these cases is ten years, and this
should apply also in this case,.says Katarina Berglund Siegbahn.

JK focuses on the grounds for the deprivation of liberty.

-JK counters the National Police Board, who argues for refusal for
granting any damages. The decision of JK is foremost an instruction to
the police: they're required to start identifying the individuals in
order to decide on whether they have any viable grounds to deprive
anyone of their liberty, says Sabina Saidi.

-I probably wouldn't have made a report to the police if I hadn't been
hurt. As far as I know, I am the only one who claimed damages from the
state for what happened at Järntorget, and therefore the only one who
now have received damages.

It isn't the injury, but the deprivation of liberty she was granted damages
for.

-A thousand kronor isn't enough even to cover the hospital bills I've
had for my injured knee, and it took several years until it healed. To
be granted the damages feels good for the sake of the principle, and
it's a surprise considering the legal afetrmath of the Gothenburg
demonstrations. But it's sad that they think one has the right to hurt
people. My entire view of the police changed in Gothenburg. I was
afraid of policemen for a long time.