POLICE SHOOTINGS IN COPENHAGEN
As mentioned in FECL No.16, Danish police forces shot into crowds of mostly young and angry stown throwing demonstrants during the night following the Danish referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, on 18/19 May. Here is a first report on the incident.
The police fired at least hundred shots and made more use of teargas than ever before. 11 youth were hospitalised with grave injuries (head, back and stomach) resulting from bullets. At least two more youth were wounded, but sought other treatment because they feared going to the hospital. Several police officers were hurt too, but none of them needed hospital treatment for more than a day.
Already the day after the dramatic events, the Prime Minister, the Minister of Justice, and the Chief of the Copenhagen police forces declared their full support for the police's conduct and stressed that there was no need for further investigation. The use of fire arms by the police was justified with an alleged serious threat to the lifes of policemen.
However, video films produced by alternative TV channels and reports from witnesses brought to light in the following days that plain-clothed officers of the special branch of the police, URO-patruljen, played a very active and dubious role in the street fight, throwing stones themselves and encouraging the battle-dressed police forces to fire. It was also documented that, as opposed to early assertions of the police chief, police opened fire at two occasions at least.
This evidence raised questions that demanded answers from the responsible authorities, such as: Who was in command that night? Who gave the order, first to fire warning shots and then, to shoot into the crowd? What was the role of the special branch that night, and why were so many of its plain-cloth officers in the area? Why did an obviously to small group of battle-dressed police (18-24 officers) try to resist massive stone throwing instead of retiring when they ran out of teargas before support units could be sent to the scene? Where regulations on the use of lethal weapons by police respected?
The leadership of the Copenhagen police forces has been strongly questioned and their is mounting criticism about the role and the activities of the URO-special branch.
The Minister of Justice was finally forced to order an investigation of police behaviour during the events. The investigation is also to include a research on the "youth scene" and political activities in the area. The Danish prosecutor general, Asbjoern Jensen, will be in charge of the investigation. This has drawn renewed criticism, as Mr. Jensen and his institution are not seen as unprejudiced.
Other aspects of the May events have given rise to angry protest and new questions, such as: Is it ethically and legally acceptable that the hospital staff handed out names and other personal data of young injured patients to the police? The head of the medical doctors' union now demands an investigation and a political discussion on the status of the medical law when it conflicts with other laws. The question is, whether doctors and hospital staff can be forced to break their vow of secrecy, as they felt they were.
Did the police further act adequatly and in compliance with the law, when arresting the injured youth and examining and impounding their personal belongings?
Thus the concerned were treated as criminals, although there appears to be no evidence that they were shot at because of some particular behaviour, but were accidental victims of shots fired indistinctly into a crowd.
More generally, the old question of police investigating police behaviour has come up again with new intensity.
Amnesty International has initiated an alternative investigation.
On the other hand, one of Denmark's leading dailies, Berlinske Tidning, has launched a veritable inflammatory campaign against all non-conformist groups, ranging from Copenhagen's "youth scene", to leftwingers and other politically or socially active groups. In a series of articles all these very heterogenous groups, whose only common denominator might be their opposition to EC-membership are presented as being highly organised and all related to lesser or greater extent to international terrorism.
Meanwhile, both the meeting of the TREVI-ministers and of the European Council in Copenhagen took place under security measures and police presence unprecedented in post war Denmark, because of an alleged terrorist threat.
Aleady now, one thing seems certain: The may events are likely to poison the political and social climate in Denmark for a longer time.
Ida Koch (Copenhagen)