Protest at DCC's ban on postering

by Dr No Thu Dec 29, 2005 11:13

If the various groups took care to take down their posters after their events had taken place the litter act wouldn't be an issue.

You've only yourselves to blame Rory.

by Noddy Fri Dec 30, 2005 21:53

First read the LITTER ACT, 1982 here>>

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/ZZA11Y1982S7.html

In this you will read the following text under section 7

" A prosecution shall not be brought in a case in which an offence under this section is alleged to have been committed in relation to an advertisement if—
(a) [ .........]
( b ) the advertisement—
(i) advertises a public meeting, or ....................



Folks, how clear can this be?

Its written in plain english.

This law SPECIFICALLY mentions public meetings as being IMMUNE from prosecution.

Any demonstration is a public meeting

So these posters are clearly lawful and the clear intention of the act is to give immunity from prosecution to those posting notices of public gatherings.

The act does set out a time limit of 7 days after the date of the event however>>

"unless the advertisement has been in position for seven days or longer after the day specified in the advertisement for the meeting or the latest day upon which the poll was taken for the election, bye-election or referendum concerned."

This proviso is a perfectly just as far as I can see. It does not impinge on freedom of assembly. The prosecution can proceed only if the poster/ advert is not removed in 7 days, and this is fair because the freedom to post is matched by the responsibility to remove, which I'm sure we are prepared to accept.


The act of pulling down posters is a breach of civil rights and impinges on the right granted on freedom of expression in the constitution.

Its a political act, to censor dissent.

This is a CAT and MOUSE situation designed to wear us down.

It has worked quite well for the state up to now, so it will continue.

Our activity (putting up posters etc within the time limit ) is CLEARLY LAWFULL.

Their activity (pulling them down ) is not directly illegal but they are sailing very close to the wind legally, It has to be TESTED by us in court somewhere.

FACTS ARE IN REAL LIFE However are different .......... .....
They have hundreds of guys to pull down the posters (and it costs them not a red cent extra )

WE have limited number of guys to put them up and the posters cost us lots of cash.

And we get shut up.
So they're playing a smart hand.....

Any comments?

by DD Thu Jan 05, 2006 01:05

One: the people who take down the posters are our very own proletarian brothers (few sisters) in the cleansing department. I questioned one one day in the act of removing posters in O'Connell Street. The man did not tell me where to get off, but explained that he was instructed to take down the posters. So, while the unions in the Corpo (SIPTU Local Authorities Branch and IMPACT) have been less than revolutionary of late, this is a case for bringing the matter into the unions.

Don't expect instant success, but a sustained effort could bring a response. Actually, on democratic and free-speech grounds this might be something that might be fruitfully raised at committee, conference and leadership level in the unions.

Two: if ever there was a simple issue that united the entire left, with no complications about different policies and perspectives, it is on the right to poster. A material issue that has materially hampered the functioning of the left over the past while. There surely can be a united campaign on this?

(And, oh dear!, we have the law on our side!)

We would be seeking, not the right to fly post with paste, but to put up removable posters that cause no damage, for public meetings, which would be taken down (the fun part) within a week.

by T Fri Jan 06, 2006 15:35

Re: Dr No.

The postering ban had nothing to do with littering and was all about choking off the voice of dissent.

For example during the Bin Tax campaign, I can recall on numerous occasions where posters were torn down by council workers and litter wardens within minutes of them being put up.

The success of the Feb 15th AntiWar protest turnout where between 100k and 150k people marched greatly concerned the government. Their response was clearly to instruct their party colleagues in the council to impose a ban on postering.

Postering is one of the few means to get the message out to the public that there is a public meeting or protest taking place. Besides Indymedia, which still relatively few of the population read, there is largely no other mechanism.

The newspapers and media of TV and Radio are banned from allowing any form of political advertising which very handily covers these forms of disent. Therefore all of these avenues are closed off.

It is a very effective mechanism for controlling society, considering of course, that the vast majority of the media is corporate owned or state owned and so operate on behalf of the elite.

Lastly it's ironic that with all the illegal dumps many of which include toxic waste that virtually no-one has been prosecuted and more importantly no effort has been made to clean them up. If you were really concerned about litter Mr No, then you should be concerned about these. Clearly you are not.

However there is no problem advertising commerical events. The state over the years has managed to convince the population that politics should be left out of matters to do with the economy and the daily running of society. This has been a coup of sorts, because the effects of all other activity is effectively political anyhow and has poltical consequences. Political matters it turns out are only allowed to be voiced through the carefully controlled and self-censored media.

by harry - constituted person.(like you). Sat Jan 07, 2006 03:16 harryoreilly at eircom dot net dublin dublin

Just invoke article 40 of OUR Constitution.
Nearly all situations regarding the erosion of all People's Rights , 'dance around ' Article 40 (unjust attack).It is up to every Constituted Person to invoke their Constitutional Rights through registered Mail or in open Court,This method puts the issue "on the record". A registered Letter is a legal document, they cannot deny they received same.
All members of the legal profession are primararly sworn officers of the Court and not to the Constituted Person. Thereby maintaining the staus quo. The power is your hands. The system does not want you to knoow this information. Always stick to the Constitution and do not believe the lies of "your" Solicitor/Barrister.

by Robin Sun Jan 08, 2006 22:31

What is the law in regards pasting up posters? Is it legal? Does it have to advertise a meeting?

by pat c Mon Jan 09, 2006 12:21

it seems to be illegal. various councils have successfully prosecuted activists for pasting posters.

i along with some other afa members and sp members were issued with fines for giving out leaflets outside the GPO. but through lobbying of councillors we got the fines quashed.

i know that ryanair (hiss!) successfully fought a prosecution for leaflet distribution.

by pat c Mon Jan 09, 2006 20:58

demo took place. about 20 on it. adjourned early do to it being a little cold. it didnt look as if the motion would be reached tonight.

by T Fri Jan 20, 2006 15:32

The poster ban was never about litter, not now, in the past or in the future.

Here's a classic example of what it is all about -supressing dissent.


"Last night over 80 people turned up at public meeting in Finglas village, called at very short notice, to plan the actions to be taken in the coming days. The City Council, in an outrageous attack on the right to free assembly, had contacted the management of the pub where the meeting was held, threatening to fine the owners a €1000 for the erection of posters advertising the meeting. This blatant attempt to force a cancellation of the meeting failed but it is an indication of how low the Council is prepared to go in its attempts to undermine the campaign."