#Anarchism all over the #world - WEDNESDAY 29 JULY 2020

Today's Topics:

   
1.  yeryuzu postasi: Anti-Netanyahu protests continue spreading
      in Israel (tr) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
2.  France, Union Communiste Libertaire AL #307 -
      Antipatriarchy, Aurore Koechlin: The Fourth Feminist Wave (fr,
      it, pt)[machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
3.  anarsist faaliyet: Bahçelievler is a Massacre, Murderer is
      a Murderer (tr) (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
4.  Philippines, A statement by Bandilang Itim: Interlinking our
      Struggles in Gender and Queer Issues [machine translation]
      (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
   
5.  PALANG HITAM INDONESIA: Update on Anarchist Prisoners
      Involved in Vandalism (Tangerang and Bekasi) 
     (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1



Thousands of people in Israel acted with the request of resignation of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for his corruption case and failure
to combat the new type of coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak. ---- The actions against the Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel, which was
affected by the second wave in the Covid-19 outbreak and where unemployment exceeded 20 percent, continues at full speed. ---- People in
different cities of the country, especially West Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, took to the streets for Netanyahu's resignation. ---- Upon the call
of the group known as the "Black Flags Movement", the slogan of "Return to Bibi (Netanyahu) home" was frequently thrown in the action
organized near the Prime Ministry residence in West Jerusalem. ---- The police, which blocked the roads leading to the street where the
action will be carried out, blockaded the area.

Some of the activists with black and red flags wore T-shirts with the "prime minister", referring to the Israeli Prime Minister.

A small number of Netanyahu supporters also held a demonstration in front of the Prime Ministry residence to support the Israeli Prime Minister.

Police set up a barricade between the two groups to avoid tension.

An activist was detained by the Israeli police for carrying the Palestinian flag.

Police attacked the action organized by the Black Flag Movement in West Jerusalem on Thursday and detained five people. (Source: ETHA)

http://www.yeryuzupostasi.org/2020/07/26/israilde-netanyahu-karsiti-eylemler-yayilarak-suruyor/

------------------------------

Message: 2



In her book The Feminist Revolution, Aurore Koechlin returns to what are called the "waves of feminism". In addition to the three known
waves, she proposes a fourth: what consequences will this have for thinking about the struggle ? ---- The word "wave" was first used in
1920, and then gradually became the way feminists refer to the different phases of their struggles throughout history. This word makes it
possible to mark both a rupture and a continuity between the various modern feminist mobilizations, at the same time as it allows to express
the fact that these mobilizations last several years and take place simultaneously in several countries of the world. Thus, when Aurore
Koechlin [1]proposes to speak of a fourth wave, it is not forgetting that there were three others before, of which we are collectively
indebted. And if the author makes this proposal, it is because she thinks that it is useful, for the fight, to think today of new stakes and
new strategies.

The first three waves of feminism
The first wave was around the turn of the XIX th and XX th century, when bourgeois women struggle to reform the institutions and obtain
civil rights and voting rights: in particular the suffragettes in England.

During the second wave, in the 1960s and 1970s, women from all backgrounds mobilized to obtain the freedom to dispose of their bodies, for
contraception and abortion. They organize themselves as a single-sex movement in the Women's Liberation Movement (MLF). This second wave is
structured around three main theories: materialist feminism which poses the fact that domestic work is the material basis of a patriarchal
domination which is both oppression and exploitation, differentialist feminism defends the idea that men and women are different, but
complementary, and feminism is a "class struggle", a sort of synthesis of the far left and feminism.

With the arrival of the left in power in 1981, the feminist movement was institutionalized, while the workers' movement remained largely
closed to its demands.

During the 1980s, the black feminism worn by Angela Davis, Audre Lorde, Patricia Hill Collins and even bell hooks) launched a third wave in
the United States, which affirms that the category "women Is not a unified whole, that these latter are crossed by different forms of
domination (race, class, sexuality, handicap...) which lead them to have possibly contradictory interests. In the 1990s, Judith Butler
developed the queer theory: she questions dominant heterosexuality, asserts that gender is not a stable identity, and that gender norms must
be destabilized to overcome them. Finally, in 1991, the jurist Kimberlé Crenshaw opened the way to intersectional feminism by asserting that
relations of domination do not add up but interact with each other.

This third wave arrived in France in the 2000s. It led to strong and lasting divisions: on the question of the hijab in 2003 ; on
prostitution and in particular the penalization of customers (question which led to the creation of the 8 March collective for all in
opposition to the position of the CNDF, and the holding of separate demonstrations from 2012 to 2017) ; on the place of trans and non-binary
people in the single-sex community.

A fourth wave born in Argentina
Aurore Koechlin identifies the birth of a fourth wave of feminism with the first Ni una menos demonstration , provoked following the
feminicide of Chiara Paez on May 10, 2015 in Argentina. This is reflected in the struggles for the right to abortion in Poland in autumn
2016, in Iceland in spring 2018, in Argentina with the green pañuelazo verde scarfin spring-summer 2018 ; within the student movement in
South Africa, Chile ; in the United States with the Women's Marches from 2017; via the #MeToo wave in autumn 2017. Centered on the issue of
violence, this fourth wave forges explicit links with labor struggles and for equal pay: women's strikes (productive and reproductive work
strike) s 'organize in 2016 in Argentina, Iceland and Poland ; this leads to the idea of an international women's strike on March 8 of each
year, which was a colossal success for example in Spain in 2018 and 2019. Also remarkable, the mobilization during the women's strike in
Switzerland there is just a year old, June 14, 2019.

In France, Aurore Koechlin affirms that it is the issue of gender-based violence that marks the arrival of the fourth wave, via the #MeToo /
#BalanceTonPorc movement in autumn-winter 2017. Subsequently, the question of feminicides has gave a concrete and political reality to this
phenomenon. The creation of the collective "Nous tous" in 2018 made it possible to overcome the divisions that have weakened the feminist
movement since 2012 by focusing on the issue of violence and avoiding those of the veil and prostitution: on November 24, 2018, 50,000
people parade throughout France in unitary demonstrations (the collective Nous also rallying finally).

The fourth vage is driven by a revolt against violence
Identifying this fourth wave is a question of strategy for Aurore Koechlin: "'saying' a wave is always also 'doing' it: the description is
prescriptive" . The "crisis" of the productive sphere that began in 2008 has led to an increased liberalization of reproductive tasks, the
uberization of society and personal services, and a violent reassignment [2]of women and gender minorities to these tasks. . Reaffirming the
total interdependence of capitalism and patriarchy, the author calls for going beyond reformist feminism as well as intersectional feminism
[3]n ° 306 - June 2020 " Feminism and social transformation: limits of individualizing strategies",]]to reinforce revolutionary Marxist
feminist strategies.

This, she tells us, means reconnecting with a materialist approach which affirms that there is "an integrated and combined system of the
various relations of domination anchored in history and the societies considered (class, race, gender), produced and reproduced. by
economic, social and political structures (State, justice, police),[and which]has as a material basis a mode of production and reproduction
which are correlated" ; that it is necessary to "postulate the strategic centrality of productive and reproductive work", "develop specific
demands on reproductive work", and "specific means of struggle around reproductive work, such as the reproductive work strike" .

Adeline (UCL Paris north-east)

Validate

[1] Aurore Koechlin, The feminist revolution , Amsterdam Publishing, August 2019, € 12.

[2] The author wonders if the apparent explosion of semi-private violence against women today might not, to a certain extent, be comparable
to the witch hunts of the Middle Ages.

[3] See[[Libertarian alternative

https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Aurore-Koechlin-La-quatrieme-vague-feministe

------------------------------

Message: 3



A press statement and protest has been made in front of TV Channel "Haber Global, regarding putting "Haluk Kirci" up on a program aired on
the channel and justifying the massacre he participated in. Our comrades from Anarchist Youth(Anarsist Genclik) have attended the protest
with their banners "Murderer is a Murderer" "Bahcelievler is a Massacre" written on.
On October 8th 1978, Haluk Kırcı and 6 other fascist murderers slaughtered 7 revolutionists in Ankara, Bahcelievler District.
Sokak
https://anarsistfaaliyet.org/sokak/bahcelievler-katliamdir-katil-katildir-english-below/

------------------------------

Message: 4



Silence is not golden ---- Some among us in Bandilang Itim are men who are cisgender and/or heterosexual. As cis/het men in Bandilang Itim
who are raised with the privilege of being men, we are not experts on gender or queer issues nor have experience as women or queer. This
ought not mean we stay silent on the issues that confront our sisters and queer siblings. As Adrienne Onday declares in her important piece,
"Wrath Over Pride: A call-out post to ‘radical' cis (het) men and their inadequacy in gender struggles," "[Y]our silence is violence to us."
Our silence is violence to those struggling against gender-based oppression. We have people we love-partners, family, comrades, and
friends-who are queer or who are women, and we owe it to them to speak against cisheteronormative discrimination and patriarchal practices
that persist in our milieus and in our spaces. Queer people and women are angry that they still experience discrimination, infantilization,
and oppression within our spaces. They are tired that they are consistently alone when they speak out against their own oppression. Not
having queer experiences is not a reason for staying silent. If we do not have these experiences or expertise, we then ought to defer to the
experiences of queer people and women. The issue of silence, censorship, or ignorance of women or queer issues is also a violence itself.
When we are silent we are accomplices to the violence of the patriarchal system and the intricate network of oppression. We must join women
and queer people and speak out for and with them especially in situations and spaces where they may not be able to speak for themselves.

We must remember that our freedom is interlinked. Our freedom is interlinked in such a way that if our queer or women neighbor is silenced
and subjugated, then that would mean our freedom is but a privilege that can be revoked. "Freedom is but privilege extended, unless enjoyed
by one and all," as a version of The Internationale is sung. Our freedom is interdependent and complimentary with another in that the
flourishing of one allows the flourishing of the other. In the same way, if someone's freedom is threatened, then all our freedoms are
threatened. Our freedom then relies on the freedom of others in order for it to be affirmed.

Thus we cannot call ourselves free if those around us still suffer from domination such as that of transphobia, discrimination, or misogyny.
As anarchist theorist Mikhail Bakunin wrote, "I am truly free only when all human beings, men and women, are equally free. The freedom of
other men, far from negating or limiting my freedom, is, on the contrary, its necessary premise and confirmation." Black feminist and civil
rights activist Audre Lorde would concur: "I am not free while any woman is unfree, even when her shackles are very different from my own."

Our attitude as allies ought not be as saviors. We must reject patronizing attitudes behind helping women and queer people and reject the a
cisheteronormative equivalent of a "white man's burden." We already know that women and queer people have their own agency; our task as
allies is then to support their agency, boost their voices, follow queer and women leadership, and work together. As an Aboriginal activist
group in Queensland in the 1970s said, "If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your
liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together." Liberation is a collective task and is not something that can be given or granted.

Likewise, we ought not forward an "allyship" based on mere passive support. As the indigenous provocation "Accomplices Not Allies" suggest,
we need to be accomplices in actively dismantling the structures of oppression. This ties into following queer and women leadership and in
supporting their agency.

What ought our intersectionality look like? A model for intersectionality comes from Dr. Angela Davis, who said that women, queer people,
and particularly the trans community have shown us that, because they show that the normalcy of cisheteronormativity and patriarchy can be
challenged, the normalcy of police, jails, and prisons can also be challenged:

So if we want to develop an intersectional perspective, the trans community is showing us the way. And we can't only point to, and we need
to point, to cases such as the murder of Tony McDade, for example. But we need to go beyond that and recognize that we support the trans
community precisely because this community has taught us how to challenge that which is totally accepted as normal. And I don't think we
would be where we are today-encouraging ever larger numbers of people to think within an abolitionist frame-had not the trans community
taught us that it is possible to effectively challenge that which is considered the very foundation of our sense of normalcy. So if it is
possible to challenge the gender binary, then we can certainly, effectively, resist prisons, and jails, and police.

Because women and queer people are able to radically question what is perceived to be normal, they show us the way to challenge and resist
other norms that ought be questioned. If Dr. Davis suggests that by challenging the gender binary the trans community makes it possible to
also challenge and resist systems of policing and incarceration, then perhaps we can take steps further. We can then challenge other norms
that so casually dominate, whether it be Capital, the State, or the very notion of hierarchy itself.To put it in another way, the notion of
the normalcy or orthodoxy is an instrument of control by the State and Capital, and queerness-embodied and in practice-is an affront to that.

Women and queer people are then integral to the fight against systems of domination like the state and capitalism. Without them, a
liberatory project will be woefully incomplete. As Onday reminds us in her piece, "[W]e can create spaces of true liberation without
you[‘radical' cis (het) men], but you cannot create spaces of true liberation without us."

Support for queer people and women should not be predicated simply on the integral place they have in the struggle against domination; our
support for them must be unconditional and for its own end. Just as an ecology thrives and is more resilient in diversity, human society is
equally enriched and made stronger in diversity.

What must we affirm?
We affirm an opposition to patriarchy, that system of domination which predates capitalism. We affirm that women, transgender people, and
gender non-conforming individuals all experience oppression due to the patriarchy. Patriarchy as a system has not always existed. If
patriarchy had to be built and instituted, it can also be dismantled and abolished. If there are cultures and peoples in this world that
have not instituted patriarchy, then we know for certain that a world without patriarchy is a very real possibility. In the Philippines,
patriarchy was institutionalized in the colonial system that systematically erased indigenous practices. Among the Bontok people of the
Cordilleras who resisted colonization until the 20th century, rape was unheard of and did not exist until recently, as documented in the
documentary Walang Rape sa Bontok (Bontok, Rapeless). If patriarchy is not a natural or eternal institution, then it can only mean that
patriarchy and rape culture had to be learned and instituted. Similarly, if patriarchy, including cisheteronormativity, are forms of
domination that had to be learned and institutionalized, then it can be unlearned and abolished.

We affirm an opposition to cisheteronormativity, that norm upheld by the patriarchal order. Patriarchy as a social order privileges certain
bodies over others, even certain male bodies over other male bodies. To counteract such privileges, we must platform, listen to, and follow
voices who are deliberately underprivileged by cisheteronormativity. We must hold ourselves accountable to harms perpetuated and make real
steps towards reconciliation and the cessation of harms.

We affirm the need for intersectionality. We affirm that the struggle for equality and justice is one with the struggle against oppression
by the State and by Capital. Issues that face women and queer people are not confined to our own circles and organizations, but also in the
workplace and the streets. Discrimination continues to adversely affect women, who face harassment and objectification in the workplace.
Queer people can be disqualified from jobs and face prejudice at the hands of the government who refuses to recognize-and as such
invalidates-their identity.

As we affirm intersectionality, we then reject class reductionist attitudes. The plurality of struggles does not distract from the struggle
in class; rather intersections of struggle are integral in combating domination in all its forms. We do not think liberation from Capital or
the State can be complete without liberation from cisheteropatriarchy.

We affirm that trans women are women, that trans men are men. We affirm that while gender is a social construct, it has real material
consequences in the form of not just discrimination, but a positive identity.

We affirm that gender is a spectrum, that other genders outside the gender binary are valid. This means we explicitly affirm the validity of
non-binary genders and people who identify as non-binary.

How We Will Be Better
We have a sexist problem in our anarchist milieu as evidenced by the lack of women and queer people who inhabit our spaces. If our spaces
are supposedly radical, ought that mean it is also radically inclusive? It is an unfortunate fact that anarchist spaces in the Philippines
have been overwhelmingly centered around men. Or to put it another way, men dominate anarchist spaces in the Philippines. Our spaces then
are not as inclusive as we claim. As cis/het men, we must acknowledge the space we take up even in online spaces. We have to find a way to
make our spaces more welcoming for women and queer people. There are no easy answers to this and we have to take the initiative to implement
such changes towards safer spaces because we have the privilege to do so: the privilege to counteract our own privileges.

So what can we do to counteract sexism and make our spaces safer? For starters we can listen to women and queer people when they speak up
and platform them so that their voices may reach farther. There is a certain cycle in which women and queer people can get trapped in. They
experience oppression or are excluded, speak up about it, and then are manspained to (that is, their experiences invalidated by men who say
so in so many words) which of course angers them, which then results in their exclusion. Such a cycle only reinforces the predominance of
men in our radical spaces. We must break this cycle through listening to women and queer people, platforming them in our spaces and
platforms, and following their leadership.

Another way we can counteract sexism and make our spaces safer is by being mindful of the space we take up, how we-as men-are not bothered
by a certain macho tendency to talk over women and queer people. Being mindful of the space we take up can be in the form of normalizing
pronoun checks as an acknowledgment that "he/him" is not a default gender. (On that point, we can also use the Filipino pronoun form "siya"
which is already gender neutral, or if in English, the use of "they/them" or a deliberate use of "she/her" in hypothetical examples.) We
need to develop the self-awareness to question if and when our perspective are male-specific. Just as "he/him" is not the default gender, so
is the male experience not the default experience. Issues like menstrual poverty, unpaid labor, rape and sexual abuse in workplaces and
prisons are all experiences we overlook if we default to a male experience. Even experiences like poverty which men, women, and queer people
face, is experienced differently by women and queer people. Such issues necessarily have different implications if a person is queer or of a
different gender

We can also be mindful of women and queer people in our spaces by asking them "are you okay?" and taking considerations for their
well-being. We can ask them how we could help them feel more welcoming in the spaces and take steps to eject people from our spaces who are
dominating, being creeps or acting in an abusive manner. It is the barest minimum to keep our spaces free from sexual harassment or oppression.

If there is harm done within the movement, whether specific abuse or a systemic issue like sexism, then these should be addressed by real
steps towards accountability. We need to be able to hold individuals accountable and for individuals to hold themselves accountable.
Accountability is a recognition that a harm has been done and real steps taken to be better. These sort of problems must be confronted up
front, with both hurt and those who did the hurting being able to acknowledge the problem and take real steps toward reconciliation and
doing better. If the harm cannot be reconciled like in sexual abuse, then the milieu is better off ejecting the abuser from their spaces
altogether. Harm done is not a matter of intent, and those who do harm must understand that, otherwise we risk upholding individual
reputations over the valid experiences of those harmed. Regardless of intent, this happened and these are the effects. The question now is:
How can we do better and prevent this harm from recurring and reproducing? Such accountability measures are not there to destroy individuals
or organizations-unless of course the matter is sexual abuse and rape, which in case, such individuals absolutely must be ejected from our
spaces and organizations that defend them similarly ejected. Except in the cases of rape and sexual abuse we do not want to destroy anyone,
we want them to be better and to make our spaces safer.

The airing of critiques and of the demands to rectify harms are not simply the airing of "dirty laundry," so to speak. There will be people
whose gut reaction is to associate such critiques and demands with malicious intent. We must resist this urge to dismiss these critiques and
demands as malicious as these are the defense mechanisms for preserving the status quo of the patriarchal order and the intricate network of
oppression.

Another way we can make our spaces safer is by upholding an anti-oppression stance that takes a proactive stance against misogyny, rape
culture, transphobia, and other harmful attitudes. We cannot compromise on inclusivity. What would this look like? For example, we, as
Bandilang Itim, are very much willing to break with anti-trans individuals and organizations even if this means forgoing cooperation with
larger groups. Cooperation with partners cannot be predicated on a compromise with transphobia or any other discriminatory practice. We
absolutely cannot tolerate harmful behavior and we will very much cut ties with people who persistently and unapologetically continue to do
harmful behavior. We must remember that such discriminatory practices have real fatal consequences for higher rates of suicide and inflicted
violence (including murder) among and against women and queer people. Exclusion from supposedly safe or radical spaces is a violence against
them that invalidates their identities and experiences which leads to their isolation. Exclusion is then literally fatal in such circumstances.

As a consequence, this means we cannot and will not work with groups that have taken an overtly transphobic stance, such as Deep Green
Resistance (DGR). We then urge the anarchist milieu in the archipelago to either ruthlessly demand associates like DGR to cease their
anti-trans positions and demand official apologies or disassociate with such anti-trans groups and persons altogether. The DGR group's
transphobia is well documented in articles such as "Against Deep Green Resistance" published in the Institute for Anarchist Studies. The
primary author of Deep Green Resistance (the book) and co-founder of DGR, Aric McBay, even came out and said that they left DGR due to its
transphobia and re-affirmed that need for solidarity and trans-inclusion. Numerous other articles document DGR's transphobia, including its
Wikipedia article. The transphobia of DGR is not merely a slip of the tongue or a one-off event that can be apologized for, it is a
recurring harm and their trans-exclusionary feminism is enshrined in their ideological program itself. Unless DGR removes their
trans-exclusionary ideology from their syllabus, they will remain to be a transphobic organization. The continuing support and collaboration
with DGR is a compromise based on excluding trans women and men and this is unacceptable. To continue to platform DGR is to continue to
platform transphobia. Ejecting DGR from our anarchist spaces or at least demanding them to renounce transphobia is a very much achievable
goal. If they do not renounce transphobia, we must make it clear that they will be isolated and atomized in their struggle; we can make
spaces for liberation with or without them. Rejecting harmful practices and rejecting alliances with groups that perpetuate discrimination
should be the bare minimum. If our values is hinged on fighting oppression in all its forms, then actively and loudly speaking up against
these harmful practices and ties ought be our norm.

Beyond the minimum then, we need to step up and amplify the voices of queer people and women. As allies, our task is to listen to them and
support their agency. In the same sentiment, we must make known the efforts of our sisters and queer siblings, recognizing their
contributions to liberatory art, music, and literature, and the actions they take alongside us in struggle against the State and Capital
across the world. By raising the issues of systemic discrimination in labor, by pursuing education on gender inclusivity in our communities,
and supporting feminist and queer movements and organizations, we can overcome the status quo and give attention to issues that affect them,
and in turn, affect us too. We must also raise the issue of violence against non-men committed by men like domestic abuse and rape and
absolutely eject abusers from our spaces and demand accountability where there is harm.

In a case like the Pride 20 where members of the queer NatDem org Bahaghari were warrantlessly arrested for organizing a Pride rally and
protest, the barest minimum would be to add our voices to the chorus of rage. In a case like Fabel Pineda-who was raped by police and then
assassinated after filing cases against the rapist cops-we can highlight the intersection of police violence and gender-based violence. In a
time when women are treated by police as commodities in exchange for safety, and queer activists are brutally detained while their
identities are insulted, the least we can do is to show their captors the true meaning of bayanihan: solidarity, regardless of sex and
gender; a revolutionary love.

We hope that this document can be part of the discussion to fundamentally abolish the patriarchal and cisheteronormative norms present even
and especially among the anarchist spaces in the archipelago. This is not an easy task, and doubtless there will still be mistakes, but we
must persevere in our commitment for total liberation if we are serious about anarchy in the archipelago. We hope that other infoshops and
collectives both in and beyond the Local Autonomous Network take similar steps in self-reflection and take positions as allies.

Tags
Bandilang Itim, gender struggles

https://bandilangitim.noblogs.org/2020/07/25/interlinking-our-struggles-in-gender-and-queer-issues/

------------------------------

Message: 5



A report written by the Anti-authoritarian Federation (FedAO) of Indonesia and an update to "Solidarity with Anarchist Prisoners in
Tangerang and Bekasi in Indonesia." ---- We are reproducing this here to signal boost this news to the international community. ----
Saturday, July 25th 2020; report written by the Anti-authoritarian Federation (FedAO). ---- Three anti-authoritarian detainees from
Tangerang and Bekasi are currently undergoing a court trial. They were arrested on April 9, 2020 for spraying graffiti that said "sudah
krisis, saatnya membakar" (there's a crisis already, time to burn) and "melawan atau mati konyol" (fight or perish). They were charged with
violating the Law of the Republic of Indonesia, No. 01, 1946, article 14 and/or article 15, and against the Criminal Code article 160. In
lay terms, they are charged with the crime of "provocation," for which the conviction could be up to 10 years of prison time.

At the beginning of their arrest and detention last April, the anti-authoritarian detainees experienced violence and isolation at the hands
of the police. They were put in isolation for about one month in which the police prevented them from meeting with their families and legal
assistance. With the support of their strong-willed families and friends, the anti-authoritarian detainees were able to secure the
assistance from public lawyers of the Jakarta Legal Aid (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum-LBH). However despite this assistance, the police still tried
to force the detainees and their families to change their legal representation from the LBH to lawyers appointed by the police department.

Since their first trial on June 15, 2020, the three anti-authoritarians have had 9 hearings already. The 10th hearing will be held on
Wednesday, July 29, 2020 with the agenda of the examination of witnesses by the prosecutor. During the previous hearings, the legal defense
repeatedly stressed that acts of vandalism are a violation of public order and therefore an indictment of 10 years in prison is not
appropriate. According to their legal assistance, public order violations are only relevant given administrative sanctions in the form of
reprimands or repainting the public facilities. Moreover, the police have made deviations from legal procedures, such as excessive violence
and isolating detainees from legal assistance and families. Following the violence perpetrated by police, the legal assistance and families
of the detainees reported these alleged violations to PROPAM last July 22, 2020. (PROPAM is the division of the Indonesian police in charge
of professional accountability and internal security, an equivalent of an ombudsman for police.)

The two other detainees who were arrested with the three anti-authoritarians are underage and have been sentenced to 4-months imprisonment.
Their confinement period will end on the beginning of August. So far, their families can only "visit" them virtually.

In addition to litigation assistance, several anti-authoritarian communities and individuals are continuing the campaign to contribute in
various capacities in support the detainees.

In Solidarity,
Anti-authoritarian Federation (FedAO)
E-mail: fed.ao@protonmail.com

https://palanghitamanarkis.noblogs.org/post/2020/07/25/update-on-anarchist-prisoners-involved-in-vandalism-tangerang-and-bekasi-indonesia/

------------------------------