If passed into law as it currently stands, the Bill would allow disconnection, website blocking and could precipitate the death of open Wi-Fi.

Come to the Piccadilly Gardens, Manchester and protest against disconnection without trial and censorship on the Internet.

Meet near the Statue of Queen Victoria.

We'll have flyers; just bring something with which to gag yourself (black tape, mask, "censored" sticker etc), we will have some spare tape if you need it!

Zoran sez, "Earlier this week (12th Dec), a massive, peaceful protest of 100,000 people -- the largest demonstration for climate justice in world history -- was met with a heavy-handed response by the Danish police. Thousands of riot police swarmed the march route, blocked off streets surrounding large groups of protestors, and arrested almost 1,000 people. Arrestees were cuffed and forced to sit in rows for hours, as the temperatures dipped below freezing; numerous people urinated on themselves after being denied use of toilets."

Of course, these protests are being motivated by frustration at the incredibly weak results of the COP-15 negotiations. Last week, a closed-room group of delegates from Global North countries shocked Global South delegates and climate justice activists by pushing for a secretly-negotiated "deal" that would allow global temperatures to be allowed to rise by another 2 degrees Celsius - over the vehement protests of delegates from Africa and small island countries, argue that any increase larger than 1 degree will devastate and - in some instances - literally flood them. Then, in the past two days, the negotiations on a deal on REDD (reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation) - which are being touted as the "success" of Copenhagen - have degenerated into an incredibly weak potential deal, in which immediate targets for deforestation limits would be dropped and no financial commitments from Global North countries would be made. These failings on the part of negotiators from the Global North have been met with protests - both planned and spontaneous - by youth activists as well as delegates from the Global South.

Crackdown in Copenhagen (Thanks, Zoran!)

'There is nothing we can say to reverse the situation,' Met police watchdog tells relatives

• Paul Lewis
• guardian.co.uk, Thursday 5 November 2009 17.17 GMT
• Article history

Ian Tomlinson's widow Julia and his son Paul. Photograph: David Mansell/Guardian

The family of Ian Tomlinson, the man who died at the G20 protest after being attacked by the police, has been told it would be "inappropriate" for an official watchdog to consider whether officers were involved in a cover-up.

Five members of Tomlinson's family, including his wife, Julia, attended a public meeting at London's City Hall today to complain that events surrounding his death were being ignored by officials.

They told the civil liberties panel of the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), which is conducting an inquiry into the protests, that police tried to "cover up" police involvement in his death, an aspect of the controversy which they feel has been ignored.

Tomlinson, 47, collapsed and died near the Bank of England on 1 April, minutes after a member of the Met's territorial support group struck him with a baton and pushed him to the ground. The newspaper vendor, who was walking home from work when he was attacked from behind, also received suspected dog bites to his legs.

"We hope your report will look into whether police tried to cover up our father's death," Tomlinson's son, Richard King, told the panel. "We feel we were led down the garden path. We do feel it was a cover-up from the beginning. He [was struck] in front of 18 officers. Not one of the officers came forward to say they witnessed what happened. Not one of the officers went to give him first aid. Not one of the officers went to help him off the floor."

His brother, Paul King, added: "There have been four inquiries into the demonstrations and the policing of G20 and we want to know why the dog that bit Ian, the baton strike and the push to the floor have not been mentioned. He was an innocent man on his way home. We have lost our dad."

However, Victoria Borwick, the Conservative chair of the panel, told the family that she believed it would be "inappropriate" for the MPA – the body responsible for holding the force to account – to take up their concerns. "There is nothing any of us can say to reverse the situation of what happened last April," she added. "We are extremely sorry."

After the meeting, Borwick said she meant to say her committee would take legal advice on whether it could investigate the alleged cover-up.

Within 24 hours of Tomlinson's death, police became aware that their officers may have been involved in a physical altercation with him. However, in public, police refused to confirm there had been contact and resisted calls for an independent investigation until five days later, when the Guardian revealed video footage of the incident.

The officer who struck Tomlinson was suspended from duty on full pay. The Crown Prosecution Service has indicated it will decide whether to charge him with Tomlinson's manslaughter in the next two months. An inquiry by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) into complaints the Met and City of London deliberately misled the public about Tomlinson's death has yet to conclude.

Among several reports into the policing of the G20 demonstrations has been a report from the Met, two parliamentary inquiries and an official review by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, the national watchdog. All have made just glancing references to Tomlinson's death, claiming they cannot prejudice the investigation into his death.

However Tomlinson's family point out that concerns which are separate from the criminal investigation into what caused his death – such as their belief they were "deliberately misled" by police – have not been addressed.

When an initial postmortem found Tomlinson died of a heart attack, the family were not told that the pathologist also found large amounts of blood in his stomach, bruising on his body and bites on his leg. Instead, they were told by police at an early stage that witnesses had seen him "run out of batteries". A second postmortem found he died of internal bleeding.

Spotter cards: What they look like and how they work

• guardian.co.uk, Sunday 25 October 2009 20.30 GMT
• Article history

This kind of highly confidential document – pictured above – is rarely seen by the public.

These so-called "spotter cards" are issued by police to identify individuals they consider to be potential troublemakers because they have appeared at a number of demonstrations.

The photographs are drawn from police intelligence files. This card was apparently dropped at a demonstration against Britain's largest arms fair in 2005.

H is Mark Thomas, the comedian and political activist. Asked why it was justifiable to put Thomas, who has no criminal record, on this card, the Metropolitan police replied: "We do not discuss intelligence we may hold in relation to individuals."

Thomas had been acquitted of criminal damage after attaching himself to a bus containing arms traders at a previous fair.

The Met said: "This is an appropriate tactic used by police to help them identify people at specific events … who may instigate offences or disorder."

The arms fair "is a biannual event that is specifically targeted by known protest groups, who in the past have stated their intention was to shut down or disrupt the event." As the cards are "strictly controlled", the officers who lost it were "dealt with".

On Comment is Free today Thomas writes: "Protesters – or, as the police call them, 'domestic extremists' – are the new 'reds under the bed'."

Protester injunction bid rejected

Steve Acheson said his sacking has had a big impact on his family

An energy company has been criticised for taking legal action against a protester under the Terrorism Act.

Scottish and Southern Energy's attempt to serve an injunction on electrician Steve Acheson was dismissed and called "a fantasy" at the High Court.

The firm wanted to ban him from holding peaceful protests at Fiddlers Ferry power station, Cheshire, where he worked until his sacking in December.

The energy firm said it planned to pursue a county court injunction.

"I am just so relieved, what they tried to do was diabolical," Mr Acheson said.

The judge, who took less than three hours to hear the evidence and decide on his verdict, told the energy company that their claims were "fantasy bordering on the edge of paranoia".

Scottish and Southern Energy had tried to curb his protests because, it claimed, he was a risk to the staff and overall security at the site.

Mr Acheson, however, said it was a protest against his former employer BMSL after he was dismissed in December last year.

'Big impact'

The father-of-two, from Denton in Greater Manchester, used to work for the firm at the Fiddlers Ferry site, which is owned by Scottish and Southern Energy.

"Seeing as I used to work there it seemed appropriate to protest and make my point there.

"I have been protesting for the past 44 weeks. It is only in the past couple of months they have suddenly taken a dislike to it.

Steve Acheson has been protesting outside the factory for 44 weeks

"This has had a big impact on my wife and my children. I want to get back into work, so I will continue protesting back at the site."

Mr Acheson recently discovered he was on the union blacklist, among the 3,000 workers named on an illegal database which was exposed in court in July this year.

The list was drawn up and accessed by a number of companies, so they could check if potential employees were union troublemakers.

He said: "Work has been very hard to come by because of my name being on this blacklist, I am not a troublemaker.

"In the past four years I have worked just 16 weeks. Before my name appeared on this list I had regular work, no problem."

Climate change activist stopped from travelling to Copenhagen

• Chris Kitchen held under anti-terrorist legislation
• Activist planned to attend UN summit protest talks

• Paul Lewis
• guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 14 October 2009 13.53 BST
• Article history

UK border police used anti-terrorist legislation to prevent a British climate change activist from crossing over into mainland Europe where he planned to take part in events surrounding the forthcoming United Nations summit in Denmark.

Chris Kitchen, a 31-year-old office worker, said he feared his treatment by police could mark the start of a clampdown on protesters, hundreds of whom are planning to travel to Copenhagen for the climate change talks in December.

Tonight he will make a second attempt to reach Denmark, where he plans to take part in discussions organised by a network of protest groups coming together under the banner Climate Justice Action.

He said he was prevented from crossing the border yesterday at about 5pm, when the coach he was travelling on stopped at the Folkestone terminal of the Channel tunnel.

Kitchen said police officers boarded the coach and, after checking all passengers' passports, took him and another climate activist to be interviewed under schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000, a clause which enables border officials to stop and search individuals to determine if they are connected to terrorism.

The passports were not initially scanned, Kitchen said, suggesting the officials knew his name and had planned to remove him from the coach before they boarded. During his interview, he was asked questions about his family, work and past political activity. The police also asked him what he intended to do in Copenhagen.

When Kitchen said that anti-terrorist legislation does not apply to environmental activists, he said the officer replied that terrorism "could mean a lot of things". By the time his 30-minute interview had concluded, Kitchen's coach had gone.

Police are understood to be monitoring protesters on a number of databases, some of which highlight individuals when they pass through secure areas, such as ports.

Kitchen is a prominent activist who has taken place in a number of peaceful acts of civil disobedience, such as glueing himself to a statue in parliament, to call for more action to cut carbon emissions.

"The use of anti-terrorist legislation like this is another example of political policing, of the government harassing and intimidating people practising their hard earned democratic rights," he said. "We are going to Copenhagen to take part in Climate Justice Action because we want to protest against false solutions like carbon trading and to build a global movement for effective, socially just solutions.

"People who are practising civil disobedience on climate change in the face of ineffectual government action are certainly not terrorists, and I am sure that their actions will be vindicated by history."

Kitchen said police paid for a ticket for him to return to London after questioning and arranged for the coach company to give him a seat on another coach.

A Home Office spokesman said: "There has been no change in policy. Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act 2000 enables an examining officer to stop, search and examine a person at a port or in a border area to determine whether they are someone who is or has been concerned in the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism.

"The exercise of the powers by the police is an operational matter for each force."

Police in riot gear use their batons against demonstrators as they clash near the Bank of England in the City of London during the G20 protests. Photograph: Andrew Winning/Reuters

Police officers' notebooks lodged at the high court tell how they punched people in the face and beat others with riot shields during the G20 demonstrations in April.

The notebooks, which have been lodged as evidence in an action brought by three protesters, also disclose how Metropolitan police were given no restrictions on the use of force when they were ordered to move protesters attending the Climate Change camp in the City of London on 1 April. The accounts were written up the day after the demonstrations.

In one notebook, a police constable recounts how when he saw a protester pushing against officers' shields: "I punched him in the jaw and he moved backwards."

Another officer describes how he hit people with "shield strikes both flat and angled. I also delivered open palm strikes to a number of individuals and fist strikes as well."

A third constable logged: "To get the protesters who would not move, I needed to hit the flat part of my shield to get them to move back. I also used open-handed palm strikes. Once the protesters were moved back to the required distance, we remained in a closed cordon until relieved."

During the demonstration a newspaper vendor, Ian Tomlinson, died after a confrontation with police.

The logbook revelations are included in court documents lodged in a legal challenge by solicitors Bindmans against the Met brought on behalf of three Climate Camp protesters, criticising the use of "kettling", the controversial police tactic of forcibly containing a potentially disruptive crowd, as "unlawful" and unjustified.

Other Scotland Yard documents include the logbook of the officer in charge of policing the Climate Camp. It reveals that the decision to "kettle" was taken just moments after Chief Superintendent Michael Johnson, the "Bronze" commander responsible for the day's tactical decisions, was informed there was a "party atmosphere" among the crowd.

The police logs state that, at 6.12pm, Bronze command received information, possibly from an undercover informant in the Climate Camp, that there was a "party atmosphere. No issues."

Five minutes later – at 6.17pm – the log suggests that a decision to "kettle" was taken, with actual containment commencing at 7.07pm.

Moments before the kettle was brought into operation – at 7.04pm – lines of police officers begin advancing into Bishopsgate, where the Climate Camp was sited, and shields were used to push back protesters. The police log, however, does not comment on the levels of force that were to be used by officers to force back the demonstrators.

An account in a police constable's notebook states: "We were directed to push back the Climate Change protesters approximately 20-30 metres beyond two alleyways … I used my round shield to push back the crowd, which was 15 people deep."

Frances Wright, a member of the Climate Camp's legal team, said: "Having read all the documents that the police have disclosed so far, I still don't know who ordered force to be used at 7pm or why it was needed.

"The violence that Ian Tomlinson experienced was not an isolated example and the result of a few bad apples, as the police would like us to believe. An attitudinal change is needed."

Christopher Abbot, 30, from Reading, who described how his girlfriend was injured after being dragged by officers outside the police cordon during the Climate Camp and then shoved back into the crowd, is one of the complainants.

Despite his girlfriend "requiring urgent medication", it is claimed that officers refused to let her leave to receive treatment. It was not until after 11.15pm that she was allowed to leave the cordon, by which time she had "collapsed".

The disclosure of such sensitive material comes as Climate Camp organisers are set to unveil a new protest site at an undisclosed location in London this week.

In an attempt to counter unease over heavy-handed policing, Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison will unveil a new "softly, softly" strategy on Thursday for dealing with public protests following widespread criticism in the wake of the G20 protests.

A report by the police inspectorate recently condemned Scotland Yard's operation during the G20 rally as "inadequate" and belonging to a "different era".

Earlier this month, the Independent Police Complaints Commission criticised officers for pushing a 23-year-old woman with riot shields. She was already bleeding heavily and may have suffered a miscarriage as a result. The woman was also detained in the Climate Camp "kettle" and prevented from receiving medical attention for up to five hours.

John Halford, a human rights specialist at Bindmans, said it was telling that none of the constables' logbooks mentioned any early release arrangements for protesters who were ill or injured.

The other two claimants are Hannah McClure, 21, who claims that riot officers pushed her with shields, and Joshua Moos, 21, who says he was hit by police despite holding his hands behind his back to demonstrate that he was a peaceful protester.

Halford said: "Most chilling of all is the absence of a single recorded instruction to those officers about when they could use force and what would be reasonable, given this was a peaceful demonstration.

"In the absence of such instructions, many officers apparently behaved as if they had been unleashed on a rioting mob. If they were instructed to use violence in the way they did, that was unlawful. But the failure to prevent this from happening was an equally serious dereliction of their senior officers' duties."

A Met spokesman said: "Every officer is accountable under law and fully aware of the scrutiny that his action can be held open to. The decision to use force is made by the individual police officer, and he must account for that."

He added that the use of "kettling" was a "recognised tactic in public order policing".