Last week I attended the funeral of Bruno Hall. It is a year
since his son, Mark Duggan (pictured), was shot and killed by police officers
on the streets of Tottenham. Bruno was given his send-off in the same church as
Mark, and buried in the same plot. For the hundreds of mourners, it felt like
we were reliving the trauma and emotion of Mark's death all over again.
Bruno passed away not knowing why his son had been killed.
One of the last things he said to me was that he had more unanswered questions
than he had on the day of Mark's death. Much has been written about Mark's
killing and the subsequent disorder that spread across the country. However, it
would appear that very little has been learnt about its root causes, especially
by those in positions of power.
The riots that took place in Tottenham did not happen
because of the shooting of Mark Duggan: if this was the case the rioting would
have started on 4 August, the day he was slain. The rioting was sparked by the
inadequate response to demonstrators who had gathered outside Tottenham police
station two days later to voice their unhappiness over the treatment of Mark's
parents. This is important and must be acknowledged if we are to avoid future
outbreaks of social unrest.
The Metropolitan Police Service has clearly not learned
this. It was forced to apologise publicly to Mark's parents, after failing in
its legal requirement to inform them of their son's death. But it still doesn't
understand that had it performed its basic duties, demonstrators need never
have gone to the police station. And if we hadn't attended there would have
been no rioting that evening. It is that simple. Yet, even after having
apologised, the Met still compiled a report, Four Days in August, that sought
to lay the blame for the riots on those who led the peaceful protest. Clearly
they should be focusing on improving the way they respond to such incidents –
or, better still, trying to ensure such incidents do not arise in the first
place.
The Independent Police Complaints Commission's investigation
into the operation that led to Mark's death is another great concern to the
family. The IPCC meets regularly with family members in what they call
"update meetings", but actually tell them very little.
The whole issue of disclosure of information, or the lack of
it, has become a significant feature of this investigation, with the inquest
coroner having to demand that the IPCC hands over all its evidence for him to
examine. But it's hard to know what this evidence amounts to, as the officers
involved in the shooting still refuse to give statements or to be questioned
directly by the IPCC. There is also the suggestion that the laws that keep
secret any telephone-tapping activity by the security services may be enacted
in this case – meaning that an open inquest, where all the evidence is
presented to a coroner and a jury, might never take place. It's as though a
veil of secrecy has been thrown over the entire investigation. This clearly
undermines the confidence that the family, and many within the community, have
in the IPPC's ability to conduct a thorough, transparent and robust
investigation.
It is ironic then that, in the time the IPCC has taken to
tell us so little, there have been three separate "independent"
reviews, published with much fanfare, that are already gathering dust. The
Tottenham Community Panel's review, Taking Tottenham Forward, was led by
Haringey councillors and their friends. While well-meaning in its focus on the
regeneration of the high road, its buzz words and jargon mean little as the
report has few measurable targets or milestones. How will the local authority,
Haringey, develop training, jobs or opportunities for those who live in its
depressed estates that are the breeding grounds for the potential demonstrators
and rioters of the future? Added to this is the recent unwarranted involvement
of the police, whose interference and intrusive style of policing led to the
last-minute cancelling of an event to commemorate Bruno's life and passing.
Incidents like this mean there will always be the potential for conflict
between those with power and the powerless.
Despite all of the investigations and reviews of the last 12
months, there is a real sense within some sections of the community of not
having been involved or listened to by anyone in authority. Things such as this
only serve to exacerbate the local people's long-felt and deep sense of
marginalisation and injustice. We should have learnt that these are the
ingredients for a "perfect storm", which can break out any time.
Written by Stafford Scott and first published in The Guardian
No comments:
Post a Comment