Netanyahu Riot charges are dismissed against Jaggi Singh

Concordia managers are blamed for "gross negligence"

[December 16, 2005 -- MONTREAL]  - from Jaggi Singh

Dear Friends,

Yesterday, the remaining charges against me related to the protest against Benjamin Netanyahu at Concordia University on September 9, 2002 were dismissed.

I had made a motion for abuse of process by the Crown (and by extension, the Montreal police and Concordia University) for their failure to disclose upwards of 30 videos showing events from September 9, 2002. After a motion that took several days over 2005 -- and much resistance from Concordia and their high-priced lawyers -- Judge Pierre Fontaine of the Montreal Municipal Court ruled in my favor, and agreed that an abuse of process had occurred.

In his oral ruling, the judge stated that there was "gross negligence, particularly by the managers [gestionnaires] of Concordia University", and that there was a "flagrant violation" of my right to a fair trial.

The videos in question show that the testimony against me by Concordia security guards, including the Head of Security (and former RCMP officer with 30 years experience) Jean Brisebois, was full of inconsistencies. Moreover, while it was alleged that I pushed a Concordia security guard, the security camera in the vicinity of the alleged assault shows nothing. With surveillance cameras everywhere, the unedited videos show clearly that I committed no criminal acts (as well as showing a portrait of the Netanyahu protest much more favorable to the demonstrators).

Back in April 2004 (it's been a long trial), I was acquitted of charges of conspiracy, obstruction and various alleged breach of conditions due to the lack of any evidence whatsoever (a "non-lieu" in legal jargon) after the Crown had closed their case. With yesterday's dismissal of the remaining charges of assault, illegal assembly, and more breach of conditions, I have successfully fought off all the charges that were laid against me in relation to the Netanyahu protest, all without ever needing to present a formal defense. It's a total victory, in the only criminal trial that has taken place in relation to the infamous Netanyahu riot; it's also a complete embarrassment for Concordia and the Crown. No doubt, if they hold true to form, the Crown will appeal this verdict, to prolong the proceedings.

Still, the failure of this criminal case by the Crown and Concordia raises some serious questions: Why were such baseless charges ever laid? How did the Concordia administration get away with using selective images from the Netanyahu protest against accused students at internal hearings, without providing them with full disclosure of the unedited videos? Can Concordia security guards ever be trusted to tell the truth under oath? And much more.

At trial, I represented myself, with essential help from non-lawyer activists, against two senior Crown lawyers (Gaetan Plouffe and Celine Dupuis) as well as the various high-priced lawyers who attended court, and intervened, on behalf of the Concordia University administration (Jean-Claude Hebert and Magalie Lapage of the high-priced firm Hebert, Bourque and Downs; and Jacques Bellemarre, the former Dean of the University of Montreal law school). The lawyers hired by Concordia for this case undoubtedly cost the university tens of thousands of dollars.

The trial was so long (I was charged in January 2003) because these lawyers engaged in every kind of tactic and maneuver to prolong the proceedings. For example, they tried to introduce a Global TV documentary as evidence, all while preventing more than 30 unedited videos from being disclosed. At one point, the Crown had the proceedings suspended in order to argue that the trial judge was biased in my favor. That motion failed miserably, with Superior Court Judge Boilard yelling at the Crown, "Get a thicker skin!"

Behind the scenes, senior Concordia administrators were actively involved in this case. It was the General Counsel for Concordia in October 2002, Bram Freedman, who specifically e-mailed senior Concordia security guards, urging that a complaint be laid against me. And former Mulroney-era Conservative hack, and current Concordia Vice-Rector, Marcel Danis, was involved in blocking an Access to Information request by a student union archivist in 2004 that would have clearly established the existence of relevant security videos in Concordia's possession. Meanwhile, the then-Rector of Concordia, Frederick Lowy, wrote a letter banning me from Concordia for five years, on the basis of the groundless accusations against me, without any due process whatsoever.

Now that I no longer have specific court conditions preventing me from going to Concordia, I have no intention whatsoever of abiding by Concordia's internal ban imposed by negligent and incompetent administrators, as well as senior security guards whose testimonies have been shown to be not credible.

I could not have successfully defended myself at this trial without the encouragement and support of so many people, too numerous to thank all by name. However, in particular, I want to thank my "Mackenzie Friends" (non-lawyer activists who helped me with preparation and support). I want to thank Leila Khaled Mouammar -- who herself faced bogus sanctions from Concordia University as a fellow protester against Netanyahu on September 9, 2002 -- for her hours and hours of work on videos. And I especially want to thank Jared Will, who was with me throughout the trial. Without Jared's essential help, and grounded advice, I would not have won this victory.

There is much more to write about the Netanyahu Trial, and the larger context of social justice and Palestinian solidarity organizing in Montreal. If you're interested in a more detailed look at the trial and related issues -- the smears against Palestinian solidarity demonstrators; activist legal defense; the pro-Israel lobby's uses of the Netanyahu protest; and more -- please get in touch. I hope to have a longer analysis ready to distribute soon.

Importantly, I want to stress that the protest against Benjamin Netanyahu, with all its faults, is justifiable, and defensible. Even more than three years later, the interpretations of the protest and riot at Concordia are contested. I have written previously about the Netanyahu protest, in both rabble.ca and the Globe and Mail, and I still stand behind those pieces.

You can access the articles at the following links:

-> Smokescreens and Whitewashes (in rabble.ca, November 29, 2002): http://www.rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?sh_itm=d5910a26ae56636e6d353f2f5a7645ef&rXn=1&  

-> Netanayahu and Free Speech (in Globe and Mail, September 13, 2002): http://sf.indymedia.org/mail.php?id=148889  

-> Netanyahu Speech Cancelled (in rabble.ca, September 9, 2002): http://www.rabble.ca/news_full_story.shtml?sh_itm=2ab53b966603780191c6ec78755017f9&rXn=1&  

Thanks again everyone for your support and solidarity.

In struggle, Jaggi Singh.

For more information, or to get in touch: jaggisingh2003@yahoo.ca  -- 514-848-7583