It
was a brutal police operation that defined the Thatcher years. How
did it come about that the miners in flimsy t shirts were settled
there./ How did it come about that so many police were concentrated
in one spot/ The police had dogs and horses. Margaret Thatcher
herself felt that the magistrates were going easy on the miners and
she brought the weight of the state and its power to bear down upon
that day.......The Tories had planned for a long time for
revenge....this was their chance........
On
that day in 1984, 8,000 miners who went to picket lorry drivers
supplying coke to the steel industry were met by 6,000 police
officers drawn from all over the country, commanded by South
Yorkshire police. The force included 42 officers on horseback and the
first units with short shields and truncheons ever used in Britain.
Their official purpose, stated in the police’s tactical manual, was
to “incapacitate” demonstrators.
The
news footage beamed into the nation’s homes that night is itself
central to the continuing dispute. The BBC showed miners throwing
stones and other missiles at the police, followed by mounted officers
charging into them, and then officers chasing miners, some clearly
being hit over the head with truncheons.
The
miners always said the police had brutally attacked them without
justifiable provocation, and that the attack felt preplanned. They
complained that the BBC had reversed footage, to show miners who
threw missiles seemingly before the police charge rather than in
retaliation for it. That night the prime minister, Margaret Thatcher,
who was determined to defeat the strike, and with it the power of the
National Union of Mineworkers, made it clear she believed in the
police. This was, she famously said, “mob rule” by the miners.
Far
less publicised, a year later, was the unravelling of the police
case. Officers had arrested and charged 95 miners with riot, an
offence of collective violence carrying a potential life sentence.
Yet in July 1985 the prosecution withdrew and all the miners were
were acquitted after the evidence of some police officers, including
those in command, had been discredited under cross-examination.
In
1991 South Yorkshire police paid £425,000 compensation to 39 miners
who had sued the force for assault, unlawful arrest and malicious
prosecution. But still the police did not admit any fault, and not a
single police officer was ever disciplined or prosecuted.
In
2012, after reporting by the Guardian and a BBC documentary that
showed that dozens of police officers’ statements had identical
opening paragraphs setting out the scene of a riot, South Yorkshire
police referred themselves to the Independent
Police Complaints Commission for
possible misconduct.
The
IPCC took two and a half years to read the available paperwork –
which did not include any documents relating to the planning of the
operation, as South Yorkshire police said they had not found any.
Owing to the passage of time, the
IPCC decided it would not mount a formal investigation.
But in its report, finally published last month, the IPCC found
“support for the allegation” that three senior police officers in
command at Orgreave had “made up an untrue account exaggerating the
degree of violence (in particular missile throwing)” from miners to
justify their use of force and the charges of riot. The report said
one of these most senior officers had his statement typed and
witnessed by another officer who led a team of detectives which, the
IPCC said, dictated those identical opening paragraphs of junior
officers’ statements.The report says the BBC had indeed reversed
footage in its news broadcast that night, an accusation the BBC has
never officially accepted.
Explosively,
the IPCC revealed for the first time that South Yorkshire police,
when contemplating the civil claims, recognised there had been some
excessive violence by officers and perjury in the trial that
followed, but covered it up. The force settled the claims, the IPCC
stated, “very much prompted” by senior officers’ knowledge of
this misconduct.
Three
decades on, former miners and their supporters in the Orgreave
Truth and Justice Campaign believe
they have been vindicated, but feel frustrated by the IPCC’s
decision not to formally investigate. The call for a public inquiry,
or a Hillsborough-style disclosure of all police documents to an
independent panel, is backed by dozens of Labour MPs, including party
the leadership frontrunners Andy Burnham and Yvette Cooper.
May
faces a difficult decision, of course, in confronting the established
police narrative, which many in her own party still believe. But the
campaign has already found her more receptive than might have been
assumed of a Conservative home secretary. In her support for several
new inquiries, the new Hillsborough inquests and criminal
investigations, and a starkly
challenging speech last year to the Police Federation,
May has consistently been intolerant of police malpractice.
And
there are wider reasons to set up a public inquiry or an independent
panel to review the evidence. Police in
many mining communities remain widely and deeply distrusted, which
the acknowledgement of lingering injustice could help to reconcile,
locally and nationally. More broadly, Orgreave was a landmark event
in British history, pivotal not only to the ultimate defeat of the
miners’ strike, but to the closure of the mines and other major
industries that followed, and it is important the nation knows the
truth.
We have
had Hillsborough revealed ..The next generation of the hard right
are using Brexit to argue for a continuation of the Thatcher
revolution and they are seeking to hide the truth of the Battle of
Orgreave...it must not happen there must be a full public inquiry.
No comments:
Post a Comment