About the court case for defence the camping by Cookie Mouse

from :
http://leightoncookie.blogspot.com/2008/04/durgerdam-tree-destruction-appeal-case.html
Durgerdam tree destruction appeal case in Amsterdam


It is against the laws of Amsterdam to cut down trees without permission. In the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on the Prinsengracht, it emerged yesterday, during the appeal hearing in a case against an environmental activist and protester, that the felling of over thirty mature trees in Durgerdam on May 2, 2006 was done illegally without permission from the local council, Stadsdeel Amsterdam Noord. The protester was convicted of "resisting arrest" when he climbed up one of the trees (risking his own life in the process) as the trees were being felled. Pepper spray was used against him to prevent him from continuing his protest. During the case one of the police officers that removed him from the tree said when giving evidence "the trees had to be cleaned," a polite euphemism for destruction. It was only during the summing up by the defence counsel, that a letter, sent by Stadsdeel Amsterdam Noord to Mr. L. Bergvoet of Success Parken BV, was produced in evidence. Not only was the felling of the trees done illegally, but it was also done during the time of year when birds were nesting in the trees, when the law requires that the birds be left in peace and quiet. Rubbish from the demolition was also dumped illegally on the ground, in particular the highly hazardous material asbestos, which has been banned in the EU as a building material. The sign at the entrance to the land still warns of the risk two years later. The letter from the Gemeente Amsterdam also points out that serious damage has been done to the natural environment, that will be costly and difficult to repair. All of this took place in an area that is of great natural beauty and value, a nature reserve for the many birds that use the waters of the Ijselmeer. It seems to me that the wrong person was in the dock yesterday at the Court of Appeal. How can the police assist an illegal demolition that is obviously a serious infringement of environmental legislation? The brave actions of two protesters (one of whom was later released without charge) have brought the folly of this case out into the open. It would be most unjust if this conviction was allowed to stand, when to this very day the real offenders have yet to face justice. Every day many small pieces of nature are destroyed, often illegally, and as a result little by little the natural beauty and stability of the earth is reduced. Today is Earth Day when we call those in power to account for the way in which the natural environment is not taken seriously in the political process. The Durgerdam case is one small example of many that need not have happened if more respect and care for the ecology of the natural world had been taken into account. Why was there no communication between the Chief of Police and the City of Amsterdam on the day that this illegal act took place? Why didn't the police ask the owner if he had permission to cut the trees down before they assisted in the eviction of the protesters?