It is cold, foggy and dark. The convoy of geriatric four-wheel drives snakes its way along the ridge top in Richmond Range State Forest in Northern New South Wales, Australia. Redneck country. The moon is setting on one side, and the first rays of sunlight are visible only by a milkiness in the fog on the other. We are tired, but we are near our destination.
The bulldozer sits in a log dump, looking almost alive in the mist. We stand in awe for a moment as our joints reset themselves after the jarring ride. Within three minutes a tripod is erected over the beast. A neck lock and other devices looking remarkably like torture equipment are positioned for "lock ons." I put on my legal observer shirt; we light a small fire; the radio crew makes contact with Lismore base; mobile telephones are charged; the video camera is on; and we wait for the loggers to come. I look around at the motley crew that feels like family after so many nights on blockades together - a genuine tribe. Aged six to 60, some dreads, some crew-cuts, many tats but all so committed and determined. We sing to quiet guitar; we reminisce about previous campaigns; a poem is read; and we wait. Some sleep, some smoke, some make warm sweet chai, and we wait.
The sound of machinery echoes through the hills, breaking the silence. Some scurry to place branches on the road. A North East Forest Alliance (NEFA) banner is hoisted, and a chain of four-wheel drives moves slowly down the hill, stopping at the blockage. A spokesperson, emerging almost organically from our group moves forward and greets the loggers with a smile, a welcome and the statement that there will be no logging here today. "In fact," she says, "this is a deferred area; there should be no logging at all here. The logging is illegal, and we have seized your equipment." A redneck and his 'dozer have a symbiotic relationship - separation caused by greenie activists is likely to engender rage and violence. Hence, we always carry a camera.
"You fucking cunts have no right to be here; get off my 'dozer; get out of the way. I'm here to earn a day's wages. Who's paying you, you fuckwits?" All outbursts are met with a smile. The loggers are shown those people who are locked on and those on top of the tripod, and they are invited to have a cup of tea. "Youse have no right to be here youse cunts."
"Well, we do, this is state forest. We can be here if we want. The forest is not closed, and you should go back to State Forests and get advice. This area is reserved under all agreements."
"Bullshit!"
"Well, would you like to speak to our lawyer?" On cue, I emerge from the shadows, clutching my briefcase and mobile telephone, suited and tied, even shaved. I introduce myself to the loggers, who stand in stunned silence, and I lecture them on the complexities of the deferred forest agreements, the amendments to the Forestry Act and Regulations, the defense of necessity, and the right of free speech, assembly and protest. Without a word, they retreat to their vehicles and drive off. Another blockade has begun.
Formed three years ago, Lawyers for Forests (LFF) is a group of green lawyers committed to providing 24-hour-a-day legal advice and representation for environmental activists at demonstration sites. We stay with blockaders, assisting with police liaison, legislative interpretation and pre- and post-arrest advice and representation. We have attended nine blockades, most of which were managed by NEFA. We have negotiated a six-page protocol with police for environmental actions and have prepared written advice for protesters on their legal rights and obligations. We assist people making claims for victim's compensation when loggers attack blockades, ensure that charges are pursued for violent acts and provide on-the-ground advice for lawyers working on court challenges.
It is wonderful work. Lawyers rarely have the opportunity to spend days in the bush, surrounded by music and children, learning to identify trees and the marks of endangered fauna. It is also very risky work. We have been at blockades where people were seriously injured, where trees were felled around people, where bulldozers were driven at blockades, and when loggers have attacked at night. Recently, at the Timbarra Gold Mine action, we were blockaded by pro-mine local farmers for two days. There is the ever-present threat of arrest and the personal toll of giving difficult advice without having showered for three days.
In some cases, the advice can be very complicated. A woman chains herself by the neck to a cattle grid on the border of the state forest and private land, thus blocking a convoy of logging trucks and a dozer. The logging operation is not authorized and is possibly otherwise illegal. The police inform her that if she does not release herself she will be arrested. She responds that she cannot release herself; she hasn't got the key, and mock calls for the key bring no response. We are seeking an injunction to save this old-growth forest classified as crucial for two species of endangered fauna and one of endangered flora. I am asked whether she could be successfully prosecuted for hindering the police, intimidation or anything else. The advice must be immediate and accurate.
We have had some notable successes. At a recent blockade, a security guard was charged with assault after our intervention. We are currently suing for false imprisonment regarding the mine blockade. We have not had a single successful prosecution of a protester arrested at any action where we were present, and we have had over 100 charges dropped. Police tend to behave better when a suited lawyer is watching them along with a video camera. False information espoused by loggers and government agents as to the law is immediately corrected.
Perhaps the most important success has been the development and adoption of the Police Protocol. This document is almost a Geneva Convention for environmental actions. Some examples of key clauses include:
Ç "At all times New South Wales (NSW) police service officers will act impartially, by not taking, or appearing to take, sides with any party involved in the protest.
Ç "NSW police shall not engage in harassment of people involved with the protest, including: targeting vehicles for registration or other violations, searching people or requiring people to give their names and addresses unless police have a substantive reason for doing so.
Ç "A legal observer, a police liaison person and members of the media shall be permitted into closed areas with police. The legal observer and police liaison person shall advise a person within a closed area that they are in an arrestable situation.
Ç "Where a person has 'locked on' to a vehicle or structure and is unable to leave when asked to do so, a personal support person may remain with that person during and until the person 'locked on' has been safely removed by NSW police.
Ç "The safety of the protesters shall be a primary consideration and all steps that can be taken to minimize the risk to protesters shall be taken.
Ç "In particular, tripods shall not be removed by cutting them down, as this has led to serious injury.
Ç "A cherry picker style crane, or other means which meet relevant occupational health and safety standards shall be used for the effecting of any arrests over two meters above the ground.
Ç "When a protester is arrested, and provides suitable identification, and states that he/she will not place themselves in an arrestable situation for a period of five days from that time, NSW police shall take that person's information and deal with the matter by way of summons.
Ç "The NSW police will, on request, provide the police liaison person with the names of all protesters detained or arrested and the name of the police station to which they have been despatched."
The protocol has made protest situations safer for all concerned and has dramatically reduced arrests, but there are still some interesting ethical dilemmas. How far should officers of the court go in providing advice to those who are probably breaking the law? Should these people be lawyer-free in situations where they are at risk and where the presence of a lawyer seems to make a difference? How can we effectively represent people when there is a risk of being a witness to the proceedings?
Of course one can intellectualize some clever responses - lawyers in such circumstances are not participating in a criminal activity just observing, for example. But in the end, the personal, the political and the professional are merged and a commitment to the environment overwhelms.
Contact Lawyers for Forests, c/o David Heilpern, Senior Lecturer in Law, POB 157, Lismore 2480, Australia; e-mail: dheilper@scu.edu.au.
David M Heilpern is the academic programs coordinator for the School of Law and Justice at Southern Cross University.