SENZA CENSURA n.11
Italy, June 2003

A COMMON ENEMY: THE METROPOLITAN PROLETARIAT

The new composition of North American and European bourgeoisie inside the clash with metropolitan proletariat.

On the external front the war against "international terrorism and mob states" tries to hide, and not so much, the clash among factions of imperialist bourgeoisie; on the internal front, "fought" against metropolitan proletariat, this war itself tends to give a new composition to bourgeoisie. This is fundamental because the competition, the clash among different factions of bourgeoisie has got to pay attention to the development of proletarian opposition in the center as in periphery, caused by heavy restructurings and by an increasing consciousnes, even if this is limited to a concept of "social injustice".
This strategy, in its substance, is the same inside both central and peripherical metropolies.
In this situation, the clash between U.S.A. and E.U. is not so different, because it tends to find a solution into common preventive, repressive, and military strategies against proletarian request of liberation.
During the meeting among Ministers of the Interior in Paris, despite a hot discussion about the intervention in Iraq, there has been a full agreement among European countries and U.S.A. about anti-terrorism measures.
Official papers tell about the attempt to strenghten reform procedures about inquiry cooperation to be passed into single countries, because they have stated that, beyond military operations, the full cooperation among inquiry services and Benches has caused problems to some "terroristic" organizations.
About this last aspect, the final statement tells about the necessity to implement again the definition of a common inquiry strategy and a greater operative integration, removing prejudicial and legal obstacles to a full realization of their purpose. About inquiry sources, they are interested in sharing data banks, in particular those regarding the DNA.
The agreement between U.S.A. and E.U. about repression of "criminal organizations" is an important passage at least for antirevolutionary strategy.
Although during april 2002 they defined a first draft, only now they are finding a solution.
It is interesting the discussion about the exigency on one side to keep secret the agreement's terms to violate least bourgeois democratic warranties; on the other side there is the exigency to obtain the ratifying of every European country.
The problem of the ratifying by national parliaments can be solved doing like Great Britain, which has refused the request to ratify the agreement.
So the agreement will be operative as "confidential", beyond the ratifying and strenght relationships inside every institutional seat.
About extradition, the agreement provides for the possibility to extradate also people only suspected of crimes which have to be punished with one year of jail. The extradition request will pass towards a "diplomatic way" and it will be also applied a "preventive arrest", agreed among Justice Ministers of interested countries; arrested people will be "listened" before the extradition. The extradition can be given also for people yet detained to have a trial in the U.S.A. The agreement has got retroactive effect.
Beyond extradition, the agreement provides also for an increasing inquiry and trial cooperation, from the sharing of data banks to joined investigations.
This agreement will allow national authorities to try a "criminal" (art. N.8) or to ask for communication interceptions (art. N.5).
This agreement will be applied also to European countries which have not bilateral agreements with the U.S.A., or which have not made agreements on matters dealt into the agreement itself, the acceleration in creating inquiry and operative united teams, has caused an acceleration in the definition of the European Ministry of the Interior.
Into a paper of December 2002, written during a meeting among the Europol and many representatives of European services, there is the definition of " a figure which will coordinate and control a wide group of activities regarding police and safety".
But we have to remember also the Police Chiefs Operational Task Force (PCOTF), born because of some evaluations made inside European seats, after Genoa and the 11th September, with the aim to have an instrument to keep informations rapidly and to do intelligence tasks, cooperation among "antiterrorism corps", to increase the function of Shengen data bank, to coordinate paramilitary corps used for the safety of summits. The PCTOF has not got a legal base or official procedures, and any law determining its functions.
Inside the "democratic" E.U., the metropolitan proletariat has got to deal with a national repressive, legislative and military structure, which has understood yet E.U.' indications about "struggle to terrorism".
Many experts in antiterrorism, agree in saying that inside the E.U. it has been done much to adequate repressive structures to the present "challenge to international terrorism".
Then it's clear a great lack of equilibrium between repressive measures and basic rights of bourgeois democratic freedom.
In accordance with indications of the European Council of May 2002, European countries have added to their penal codes other restrective laws which tend to give repressive structures a juridical legitimacy to attack proletarian liberation requests worldwide; a legitimacy which carries into Europe itself contradictions developed by imperialism.
About Italy, we suggest to read Senza Censura n. 7, 8 and 10, where it was deepened enough the problem of the adaptation of repression to an increasing crisis.
In Austria the penal code has been expanded with the articles 270b and 270d, to add the crime of "terrorism" and to change the article 64 giving the Justice Court judicial extra-territoriality to try these crimes.
The art. 270b contains the definition of "terroristic organization" providing for sentences until 10 years of prison for people belonging to those organizations; the art. 270c increases sentences for crimes committed by members of those organizations until 20 years.
The art. 270d provides for 6 months until 5 years to punish who finances "terroristic organizations".
In Denmark it has been created a "Legislative Package" to face the "terroristic attack".
Some experts think that maybe Denmark is violating the bourgeois international right, and in particular it could violate the Geneve agreement of 1951.
So, we can understand that also on the internal front there is a war fought by one only army, the imperialist bourgeoisie's army, against its historical enemy, the metropolitan proletariat.
Denmark put into its own order a definition of "terroristic activity" without solving the vague european definition. It's clear that they want to fight as terrorism every request of freedom inside european imperialist metropolies, judjing repressive intensity not on the ground of done actions, but on the capacity to determine greater strenght relationships for the metropolitan proletariat inside its clash with the imperialist bourgeoisie.
In March 2003, Belgian institutions have signed an antiterrorism bill. Besides, this bill increases penalties and supplies the Belgian Justice Court with extra-territoriality to persecute executioners of terroristic attacks or organizations which could do.
Greece, despite of many pressures by USA and Great Britain about the repressive campaign against presumed members of the organization called "17 November", has not taken completely european indications. The crime of terrorism has been put into Grecian regulations since 2001.
In Finland decisions have not made operative again. A provision taken during first days of January to follow european indications about terrorism, provides for the addition of antiterrorism regulations to the Penal Code and to the Coercitive Measures Act. When the Finnish government presented this provision, many constitutionalists expressed their doubts on the compatibility of these regulations with the respect for principles of political and association freedom.
On the end of January, it was approved the law punishing those who take part to terroristic organizations.
In Sweden, since last December, they have been taken european decisions. The definition of terroristic organization and activity will be given clearly during next months, defining what "is possible or not to do". In particular the discussion provides for abrogating regulations about no extradition or expulsion because of political crimes. Some experts underline how it's not much clear the difference between terroristic act and illegal action done inside political struggle.
We think they don't want to put difference between those two aspects. The will to put the second one into the international campaign against terrorism, represents the main aspect of international repression. Our definition of terrorism is another, as another is our approach to forms assumed by proletariat and its organizations' struggle.

In Holland since June 2002 they signed the WETSVOORSTEL TERRORISTISCHE MISDRJIVEN. A member of terroristic organizations can be punished with 8 years of jail, or 15 years if he is a leader. Who gives money or materials is punished as a member. Punishments for terroristic crimes are increased of the 50%.
In December Ireland signed the CRIMINAL JUSTICE (TERRORISTIC OFFENCE) BILL. Regulations provided by this bill add to those included in the OFFENCES AGAINST THE STATE ACTS 1939-1998.
The Criminal Justice Bill relates the system for prevention of constitution of terroristic organizations to the international context of fight to terrorism. The law introduces a procedure not present into european indications: if someone is thought ot be executioner of terroristic acts, or that he is organizing one, and circumstances are considered enough by the Court, he is judged guilty.
France has not taken again european indications, but surely its repressive system is equal to the others. In November 2001 France extended the definition of terrorism also to recycling and internal offence crimes.
It has been prepared a preliminary bill about persecution of criminal organizations.
In Germany the first bill about terrorism has been criticized also by bourgeoisie . In the art. 129/a of the German Penal Code, the crime called "Constitution of terroristic association" was punished yet.
It has been introduced also the art. 129/b punishing "terroristic organizations in foreigner countries".
Great Britain was the first to have a new discipline , towards the Crime Security Act 2001, as integration to the previous one, with the aim to fight Irish Republican organizations and their militants. In case of presumed terroristic activity they can be used "special" inquiry methods, they can violate legally personal freedom, control personal data, and keep vague the definition of terrorism.
We think that a more precise definition could not change anything, but it could represent an interesting ground for opportunist sectors which try to give proletariat the illusion of a chance of democracy or reform for bourgeois institution and their role in the present situation.
Also looking by a superficial way at what said before, it's clear the role which european countries and the european state itself tend to have on the internal front towards the metropolitan proletariat; which will have to become a central subject inside the revolutionary perspective into european metropolies.
We have not to underestimate the present passage to carry into effect black lists of terroristic organizations.
When the repressive overstructure will be adequated and uniformed, the european imperialist bourgeoisie will have conditions to act.
The so called movement didn't want, or wasn't able, to understand what's happening, causing a withdrawing in the comprehension of the present clash between imperialist bourgeoisie and metropolitan proletariat and the comprehension of its instruments, but causing a withdrawing also in the ability to answer the attack which will hit the most advanced parts of the movement itself.