Denmark:Norrebro: the trial and epilogue
01 January 1991
Denmark:Norrebro: the trial and epilogue
artdoc August=1994
On 18 May 1993, after the announcement of the result of the Danish referendum
on the Maastricht Treaty, police shot at demonstrators injuring at least 11
people in the N?rrebro district of Copenhagen (see Statewatch, Vol 3 no 3 &
Vol 4 no 1). In the confrontation the crowd threw stones at the police. The
police used tear gas, threw back stones themselves and fired 113 shots in the
air and into the crowd. Several of the 11 people hit by police bullets were
severely injured. 47 demonstrators were arrested and several kept in detention
- only 30 of the 47 were charged with offences and six of the 11 injured were
acquitted. This article looks at the trial and its aftermath.
The trial
The trial began on 2 March this year. The charges against the demonstrators
were: attacking public servants or officials, not leaving when ordered to do
so by the police, disturbing public order and initiating or leading the
disturbance.
The public prosecutor, Ole Weikop, claimed from the start that the mere
fact that someone was present when stones were being collected and thrown -
even if they did not throw any - indicated participation in the disturbance.
This wide interpretation of illegal cooperation had never been used in a
Danish court before and brought strong protests from defence lawyers. The
defence came into conflict with the court on two key issues. They wanted to
call 16 witnesses to fully describe the events, the prosecution argued against
this on the grounds that they were only calling 7 witnesses. The court denied
the defence several witnesses including police officers and police Vice-
Commissioners. The second area of legal argument concerned access to police
documents describing the police numbers and dispositions, radio communications
and the use of tear gas. Two courts denied N Forsby one of the defence lawyers
access to the documents - which he had been shown but was not allowed to take
a copy of. Legal experts were called to show that the documents were necessary
for the defence cases. The courts denied access on the grounds that they were
`internal' documents. Forsby then asked the Minister of Justice, Erling Olsen,
for the case to be tried in the Supreme court and permission was granted on
25 March, but the public prosecutor delayed passing the documents to the
Supreme court until 13 April - Forsby never got the documents.
After the cross-examination of the defendants one of the defence lawyers,
J?rgen Jacobsen, accused the Crown (the state) of violating the Administration
of Justice Act because they had insufficient evidence to prosecute. Several
of the suspects, he said, had suffered severe physical and mental problems
since their arrest and detention and had received professional help.
Five of the people charged admitted throwing stones at the police. The
public prosecutor argued that they should be sentenced to 6 months in prison
on the grounds that the confrontation was planned and organised by them (the
normal sentence being 60 days).
The court decides
By the end of the trial only 25 people faced charges and of these 17 were
found not guilty. Eight people were sentenced to between 1 and 3 months in
prison for throwing stones. One was sentenced to pay a fine of 500 Danish
kroners for shouting abuse at the police and another person was fined 250
Danish kroners for walking a dog without a collar and tag and not having dog
insurance. Only one of the 11 people wounded by police bullets was found
guilty as charged. No one was found guilty of organising the confrontation.
The 17 found not guilty are seeking compensation for injuries and false
imprisonment.
The sentences were immediately the subject of strong criticisms from
conservatives who thought them too mild and demanded tougher sentences for
violence against the police. One politician raised the idea of banning
demonstrators being<