Arrested Glasgow Palestine protester to appeal city centre ban
Police said it showed support for Palestine Action, a group that is proscribed in the UK under the Terrorism Act, and he was arrested.
He said given the number of arrests across the UK, he fears freedom of speech is under attack.
READ NEXT:Man arrested in Glasgow for holding Palestine sign
Mr Clerkin was given Police bail and he had to sign an undertaking not to enter the city centre until his court appearance later in the year.
(Image: Gordon Terris)
He has said it is 'draconian' and has engaged a solicitor to challenge it.
The activist said: 'I can't enter the city centre but I can speak out against the ban.'
The activist, who is campaign co-ordinator for the Scottish Tenants Organisation spoke to the Glasgow Times, at a location outside the zone he is excluded from, to tell of the impact it will have on his voluntary work and family life.
Clerkin said: 'What I was doing was speaking out against genocide and the killing of children.'
READ NEXT:Man 'banned' from Glasgow city centre after Palestine protest
He also said he is not a supporter of Palestine Action or their methods but he said the group should be de-proscribed.
The group was banned under the Terrorism Act after members broke into an RAF base in England, causing damage.
Clerkin said: 'I qualified my support in saying I support de-proscription as a terrorist organisation but I don't support them doing criminal damage. I don't agree with the destruction of property.
'I am not a member of Palestine Action. I am not a supporter of Palestine Action.'
Mr Clerkin, said there are wider implications for democracy in the UK following a number of arrests of people alleged to have shown support for the organisation.
He said: 'This is a battle for freedom of speech. Civil liberties are being attacked.
'If this is not the start of the road to a politicised police state, I don't know what is.'
He fears other groups will be targeted for the same treatment.
He said: 'Where does it stop?
'This is Orwellian. It is 1984 in operation.'
READ NEXT:Police update on Palestine Action protests during Donald Trump's visit
The protester said he was 'treated very well' by the police when he was detained but he worries how the Police are being directed by the government.
He added: 'This is policing like Soviet era, eastern European regime standards.'
His exclusion zone extends from Charing Cross in the west to beyond Glasgow Cross in the east and from Renfrew Street in the north to the south of the River Clyde.
He said it will have a disproportionate effect on his life.
Mr Clerkin said: 'It is my daughter's birthday next week. To go and see her, I will need to think about how I can get there, as I can't even travel through the city centre on public transport.
'It could end up costing me a lot more than it should.
'I regularly met tenants and people with homelessness issues in the city centre and represent people at meetings and hearings.'
If he is found guilty, he faces up to 14 years in jail.
He said: 'I'm not guilty of any crime. All I did was hold a poster. I hope sanity will prevail and the rule of law will prevail.
'I want a jury trial. If the penalty can be a lengthy jail sentence, it should be on a verdict based on the judgment of my peers.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Western Telegraph
22 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Rachel Reeves should exempt defence pledge from budget rules, says Gordon Brown
The former prime minister said the commitment to spend 5% of GDP on national security by 2035 should be dealt with jointly as a 'Nato initiative', with costs shared across Europe. Leading economists have warned the Chancellor will likely have to raise taxes in the autumn budget to plug a £51 billion black hole in the public finances. Ms Reeves is currently on track to miss one of her borrowing rules by £41.2 billion and needs to rebuild a fiscal buffer of nearly £10 billion that has been wiped out, the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (Niesr). Mr Brown, who served as chancellor for a decade in Sir Tony Blair's Labour administration, said on Thursday that the rise in defence spending should be treated as 'exceptional', as it has been in Germany. 'When you come to the fiscal position, look, there's one thing that's happened over the last few months that has been quite unprecedented – to spend 5% on defence expenditure as we want to spend by the 2030s,' he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Economists have warned taxes will likely need to rise in the autumn budget to meet a shortfall in the public finances (PA) 'But this is a Nato initiative, this is a European initiative. We should be doing this jointly. 'We should have either jointly issued bonds or a Nato defence fund, and we should be sharing the cost across the continent, and that should be regarded as something extraordinary and exceptional, outside the fiscal rules. 'That would create the kind of headroom that Rachel Reeves needs.' Germany has exempted some defence spending from its strict borrowing rules – the so-called 'debt brake' – to allow an increase in expenditure. When she entered the Treasury, Ms Reeves set out two key fiscal restrictions which she has said are 'non-negotiable'. The first rule is to ensure that day-to-day spending is matched by tax revenues so the Government only borrows to invest, and the second is to reduce net financial debt as a share of the economy. Ministers have already announced a cut to overseas aid to fund a boost in defence spending but economists have said the new Nato target of 5% by 2035 could increase expenditure by a further £38.6 billion. The Treasury has been contacted for comment.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
What Putin wants from his meeting with Trump
With just a day to go until the expiry of his ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to halt the war on Ukraine or face dire consequences, Donald Trump has once more reset the clock. Trump intends to meet in person with President Vladimir Putin of Russia as soon as next week, the New York Times has reported. That summit will be followed by a second, trilateral meeting including Trump, Putin and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Trump reportedly told top European leaders in a conference call on Wednesday night. The announcement came after Trump's envoy, real state developer Steve Witkoff, met Putin for three hours of talks at the Kremlin. Trump wrote on social media that he had 'updated some of our European Allies' about the Witkoff talks. 'Everyone agrees this War must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come.' A week before, Trump had professed himself 'disappointed' with Putin's continuous broken promises and moved up a previous 50-day deadline for the Kremlin to cease fire to just eight days – an ultimatum due to expire this Friday. And just hours before he hinted that he was ready for direct talks with Putin, Trump followed through on a threat to impose secondary sanctions on countries which imported Russian oil. 'India … doesn't care how many people in Ukraine are being killed by the Russian War Machine,' Trump said before announcing a 25 per cent tariff on Indian exports to the US due to begin in 21 days. Whether Trump will now actually impose those tariffs in light of his new plan to open talks with Putin is unclear. Trump, famously, considers himself a master of the art of the deal. He favours high-profile, face-to-face summit meetings with world leaders, whether friend or foe. In 2018 he met Putin in Helsinki for a long meeting that cosplayed the high-stakes summits between Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev that laid the groundwork for the end of the Cold War. But no deals resulted from that Trump-Putin summit, despite the fact that Putin was at the time already illegally occupying Crimea and his proxies controlled parts of eastern Ukraine. Instead, the main soundbite was Trump appearing to side with Putin over his own intelligence establishment on the subject of Russian interference in the 2016 US elections. 'No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant,' wrote the late Republican Senator John McCain, decrying Trump's toadying to Putin as a 'disgraceful performance'. This time, the stakes for a Trump-Putin summit will be much higher. People are dying every day, Russian troops are relentlessly advancing, and Ukraine faces critical shortages of air defence missiles and military manpower. Trump has repeatedly vowed to bring an end to the conflict in Ukraine, and has made several threats to impose devastating sanctions on Moscow's oil and gas clients if Putin does not comply. The pressure will be on for Trump to actually persuade, cajole or force Putin to stop his air and ground offensives in Ukraine. It's significant that Europe will be completely sidelined from the proposed talks. Clearly, Trump expects to present whatever he agrees with Putin to the rest of the world as a fait accompli. But in one important sense, direct talks between Washington and Moscow will break a deadlock. Putin has resisted being seen to bow before US pressure. At the same time, the full-scale sanctions threatened by Trump would wreak chaos on the world economy by removing the 10 per cent of the world's oil supply provided by Russia from markets, sending energy prices spiralling. The result of this standoff has been a near-farcical game where Putin pretended to negotiate while Trump pretended to assemble a formidable battery of imaginary sanctions. That phase of phoney negotiations will soon be over. The next question is what incentive Putin will have to end a war that he believes that he is winning. Russian forces appear to be accelerating their encirclement of the strategic railhead of Pokrovsk in Donbas and are advancing towards Kharkiv. At the same time political unrest in Kyiv is growing, both over Zelensky's disastrously misguided attempt to bring anticorruption agencies under his control as well as the forced conscription of men into Ukraine's severely depleted army. Desertions of Ukrainian troops from the front line are, reportedly, soaring. Head of Ukrainian Military Intelligence General Kyrylo Budanov has warned that the country could face a military collapse this summer. Putin can be forgiven for believing that time is on his side. The stark answer to what Putin wants is that he is not fighting for land but rather is fighting to subordinate Ukraine and, as he sees it, prevent it from becoming a threatening Western proxy. That's importantly different to destroying Ukraine, occupying Ukraine, exterminating all Ukrainians, or other hysterical assessments of the Kremlin's intentions. But Putin has been very clear from the start of hostilities that he will not countenance Ukraine as a member of Nato. He also demands limits on the Ukrainian military and the restoration of rights to Russian language speakers and adherents of the Moscow-loyal party of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Most importantly, Putin wants regime change in Kyiv, which means the end of Zelensky – who is already six-and-a-half years into a five-year presidential term. How many of Putin's demands will Trump concede during their face-to-face negotiations? Many Ukrainians will ask what right Trump has to negotiate over their heads – exactly what President Joe Biden vowed never to do? Many Ukrainians fear that they are about to be sold down the river in a great power stitch-up reminiscent of the 1945 Yalta carve-up of post-war Europe. 'The war must end [but] it must be done honestly,' tweeted Zelensky on Wednesday after a conference call with Trump alongside other European leaders. 'We all need a lasting and reliable peace. Russia must end the war that it itself started.' Trump's apparent answer to Europeans' concerns has been to symbolically offer a follow-up trilateral meeting involving himself, Putin and Zelensky to give at least an illusion of Ukrainian participation. That seems to be a recipe for disaster. Putin hates Zelensky for defying him and turning the short, victorious war he planned into a long and bloody quagmire. Zelensky hates Putin for massacring and abusing thousands of his people – as well as for sending murder squads to Kyiv with orders to murder him in the first days of the war. Zelensky and Trump had a cordial meeting in Rome at Pope Francis' funeral – but the bad blood after Zelensky's humiliation in the Oval Office in February persists. Meeting Zelensky would legitimise him as the leader of a sovereign Ukraine, which is anathema to Putin. In short, the meeting is as unlikely as it would be disastrous if it ever happened. The good news is that in calling for direct talks with Putin, Trump has offered a quick route to the end of the war. The bad news is that it's likely to be on Putin's terms.
Daily Mirror
2 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Good Morning Britain issues huge Donald Trump alert as White House breaks silence on Ukraine war
ITV breakfast show Good Morning Britain shared an update from Donald Trump as the US president continues to try to bring a ceasefire between Russia and Ukraine Good Morning Britain shared a big update from Donald Trump in his bid to help resolve the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The ITV breakfast show switched to a bulletin as the White House broke its silence following the US President's call with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. On Thursday, the show's correspondent, Richard Gaisford reported the call that took place, which also involved Sir Keir Starmer and other European leaders, hinted a ceasefire could be closer. The report claimed Russia now seems more inclined to agree to such a deal. It comes after a White House official said that Trump could meet with Vladimir Putin of Russia face to face and said the meeting could happen "as early as next week". It's hoped such a gathering can help bring an end to the war in Ukraine. The GMB presenter revealed the United States special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, had headed to Moscow to meet with the Russian President. It's said the the talks were "productive". However, Gaisford reminded viewers that "no real details had been released". He said: "Whatever was said, the President, who has struggled to fulfil his own promise of ending the war, said great progress had been made." After that, the show cut to a clip of Trump speaking at the Oval Office after the meeting. In that clip, Trump said: "There have been very good talks with President Putin today, and there's a very good chance that we could be ending the round, ending the end of that road. "That road is long and continues to be long, but there's a good chance that there will be a meeting very soon." Cutting back to Richard, the reporter added: "Trump also went on to say that it may not be the breakthrough he is hoping for. The pair first met back in 2018, and Trump talks of friendships and understandings with Putin. "This, though, would be the first meeting with the two since Trump came into the White House for a second time. Although they have shared a number of phone calls." While the news could be seen as a positive step, not all were convinced. A number of viewers took to Twitter /X to share their concern. "Need to see the real proof...," urged one viewer. Another added: "After this length of time, I wouldn't hold my breath," before adding an eye roll emoji. Trump admitted this week that while the talks seemed productive, he has "been disappointed before with this one". When he was asked if there had been any concession to lead to the development on Putin's behalf, Trump refused to give much away. However, he did add: "We've been working on this a long time. There are thousands of young people dying, mostly soldiers, but also, you know, missiles being hit into Kyiv and other places."
