"incitement" claims Limerick City Council

limerick | rights, freedoms and repression | news report

Thursday June 12, 2008 01:53

by Sean Clinton - Lisbon Campaign for Middle East Justice and Peace

Council remove referendum signs

Limerick City Council claim signs erected by the Lisbon Campaign for Middle East Justice and Peace (LCMEJP) were an "incitement" The Council removed at least 5 large "No to Lisbon" referendum signs from locations around the city between the 26th May and the 11th June without informing anyone. Gardai in Henry st., Roxboro and Mary St. stations have been investigating this matter for over four weeks. The story was covered in the Limerick Leader two weeks in a row and in the Limerick Independent and the Irish Times but Council officials never thought it appropriate to contact the Gardai, LCMEJP or the printers event though contact details were on the signs.

Signs replaced on Clare St.

Limerick City Council this afternoon revealed they were responsible for the disappearance of a number of large referendum signs belonging to the Lisbon Campaign for Middle East Justice and Peace (LCMEJP). The admission came following the discovery that two signs erected in the city last night were missing. A Limerick City Council official, Mr. Paul O'Grady from the Environmental Section, confirmed that following a complaint from a member of staff in a different section claiming that the signs constituted incitement he instructed their removal. Mr. O' Grady refused to disclose the identity of the member of staff or which section he/or she works in.

When asked what part of the sign constituted incitement Mr. O'Grady responded that the signs were of a political nature and "had nothing to do with the EU referendum" It was pointed out to him that if he had read the signs the bottom line clearly stated in very large bold print "Say NO to Lisbon" Mr.O' Grady then said the signs were a danger to traffic as motorists were "rubber-necking" to read them. He offered no evidence to back up this assertion. He next stated that no permission was sought from the Council to erect the signs on Council property. When asked if any other person or group had sought permission he confirmed that no one else had done so either. He then claimed the signs had defaced the green area by making holes in the ground.

On hearing all this I was shocked and amazed. I had not previously contacted the City Council about the missing signs as prior to erecting them I phoned the Council's Environmental Section to enquire about the regulation and restrictions pertaining to the erection of signs in the run up to the referendum. Aware of the restrictions I took special care to ensure the signs were all placed in locations which did not block traffic signs or interfere with lines of sight for motorists or pose a danger to pedestrians.

I began noting down what Mr. O'Grady was saying and he took immediate umbrage and accused me of threatening him. I responded "the only thing threatening you are your own words" He then asked another member of staff to call Henry Street - a reference to the Garda station. When I asked to have the signs back he said I would have to make the request in writing before he would consider it. I asked for and was given a sheet of paper and immediately requested the return of the signs in writing. He refused to give them to me and said that he would consider doing so tomorrow.

I left the office and as I was leaving City Hall a Garda car with siren blaring and blue light flashing sped up to the front door an two Gardai rushed into the building. I remained by the door and made some phone calls before heading away. I went to Henry St. Garda station and informed them about the incident and asked if a Garda would accompany me as I went back to seek the return of the signs. The Gardai would not do this. In the interim I contacted Edward Horgan, renowned peace activist and anti-war campaigner and John Hogan a journalist from the Limerick Leader and both agreed to accompany me to the City Hall.

On return to City Hall with Mr. Horgan and Mr. Hogan I asked Mr. O'Grady to explain why he had removed the signs. He presented me with a letter as follows:

Dear Mr. Clinton

Re:- Removal of signs from Green Areas

Further to your visit to this office earlier this afternoon, I wish to confirm the following:

I enclose a copy of Section 19 of the Litter Act for reference purposes (source www.irishstatutebook.ie) In this context I would refer you in particular to sub section 19(1) and 19(7).

1. I confirm that only the AA, Limerick City Council and statutory bodies are allowed to erect signs or advertising material on City Council property. A number of written dispensations are granted to community based groups subject to compliance with strict conditions.

2. I confirm that, on my instruction and on foot of consultation with the other departments and bodies, a number of signs (representing various view points) were removed from green areas across the city over the past month for the following reasons:
a) Perceived distraction to passing motorists
b) Perceived risk of collapse or damage to other property
c) Hole damage to green areas.
d) Obstruction of grass cutting.
e) Perceived worries about incitement in certain cases
f) Lack of insurance or indemnity cover
g) Absence of consent from the property owner (Council)

3. I confirm also that the City Council's policy in this regard is consistent and impartial.

Finally, Limerick City Council will return the signs seized this morning, to you, later today on receipt of written confirmation from you that they will not be re-erected on City Council property at any time.

Please feel free to contact me at any time should you wish to discuss the matter further.

Yours sincerely

Paul O'Grady
Executive Engineer,
Environment and Parks Departments.
E-mail [email protected]

I asked that the signs be returned to me immediately and Mr O' Grady refused saying that unless I gave him a written undertaking not to re-erect the signs on City Council property. I refuse to do so as I felt entitled to erect the signs as long as I observed the Regulation. I did undertake to abide by the Regulations just as other groups had done and he then agreed to return the signs.

I again asked Mr. O'Grady to identify the member of staff who had requested the signs be removed and once again he refused to disclose the persons identity. I was told that if I made a request under the Freedom of Information Act I would get a response in two months.

I was told that I could retrieve the sign from the Park Road depot. Before doing so went to the adjacent court house to seek an emergency injunction to prevent the City Council from removing the signs in the future . We were advise by legal council that the chances of getting such an order so late in the afternoon were slim.

We went to Park Road depot to collect the signs but only two of the signs could be found, four others could not be located.

Following this we decided to go back to court to try and get the injunction. At about 4:20 as a criminal case was concluding the Senior Council we had briefed earlier made an appeal to the judge but the judge refuse to consider the matter at short notice and suggested we return in the morning.

This bizarre development came about following investigation over the past three weeks by Gardai in Henry St, Roxboro, and Mary St. and following reports about the incidents two successive weeks in the Limerick Leader newspaper and reports in the Limerick Independent and the Irish Times. Yet Limerick City Council made no attempt to contact the Gardai or the LCMEJP even though contact information was on the signs.

Numerous other signs from various campaigns adorn City Council property all over Limerick yet the City Council removed all of the signs belonging to LCMEJP even though they did not interfere with traffic, block any road signs or pose any danger to pedestrians or motorists - I believe to claim otherwise is a travesty.

I believe that this incident exposes a clear abuse of power and influence by public officials and constitutes a deliberate attempt to interfere with the democratic process in the run up to a referendum. In order to allay public fears in this regard the City Council should answer the following questions:

1. How is "Perceived distraction to passing motorists" accessed, calibrated and quantified?
2. How many passing motorists were observed to be distracted and in what period of time?
3. How does the level of distraction observed compare to the distraction posed by other possibly much more attractive advertising around the city?
4. Does this criteria apply to all signage and advertising within the City and if not why not?
5. Under what statue is "Perceived distraction to passing motorists" a criterion for the removal of advertising?

6. Was it perceived by the City Council that the signs in question were at risk of collapse or damage to other property. If so on what basis?

7. What criteria are used to access "hole damage to green areas" while signs are in place?
8. If signs are in place how can there be hole damage? Surely holes only appear if signs are removed and the holes are not filled in?
10. What are the minimum dimensions of holes that constitute "damage to green areas"?

11. Given that every sign erected on a post in the ground could in some way obstruct grass cutting what are the criterion to which such signs must adhere in order not to constitute an obstruction to grass cutting?

12. What in the opinion of the city council constitutes incitement?
13. How exactly did these signs constitute incitement?
14. Has the council brought this matter to the attention of the Gardai and if not why not?

15 How many signs relating to the Lisbon Treaty referendum were removed owing to a lack of insurance cover or indemnity?

16. How many bodies or individuals have sought and been granted written permission by the City Council to erect signage in relation to the referendum?

The two signs recovered from Limerick City Council were erected again this evening in Clare Street, Limerick from where they City Council removed them, illegally I believe on Monday 26th May. I publically challenge Limerick City Council to inform the public why they removed these signs and explain why they targeted these signs while ignoring other adjacent signs.

Furthermore, in order to assure the public that the member of staff who claimed the signs were an incitement did not have a ulterior motive, this person should be identified and asked to back up the claim.