We are dismayed by the events that occurred last Friday and are shocked that orders were given to deploy the riot police against non-violent, unarmed individuals. We further deplore the indiscriminate use of pepper spray, the first time in our history against demonstrators, which was a violation of their right to protest, and showed both disrespect and contempt towards Bermudians demonstrating.

We express our support for all those injured and wish them a speedy recovery from both their physical and emotional trauma.

Bermuda Police Service protocols refer to pepper spray and other such weapons, as officer safety equipment, and that it is used only when there is an immediate and serious risk to the safety of police or members of the public. The officers who used pepper spray were above the crowd, protected inside the walls of the House of Assembly; many of the people sprayed had their backs to them and were trapped between the gates and the oncoming riot squad. People had nowhere to go. There are many arguments against the use of pepper spray:

1, The danger to life by the use of pepper spray is well documented

2, It sets a dangerous precedence for future abuses

3, It escalates the tensions of the protesters and community

4, Bystanders are often hit, as demonstrated on Friday

5, It is six times more powerful and more painful than the hottest pepper you can find on the market

6, The more oppressive the force used, the more resistance there will be

7, It violates people’s constitutional rights to assembly and free speech

8, The use of force and pepper spray is a quick fix, and denotes lazy police work. Other tactics could have been used

9, The use of force doesn’t deter people; instead, it solidifies their cause or opinion, counterproductive to the BPS’s long-term goals

10, Society’s normalisation of the use of force and pepper spray means we are modelling behaviour to others in that violence begets violence

The photograph of the two police officers using pepper spray against non-violent, unarmed individuals, many of whom were women and elderly, is a day that will not be forgotten, for it has traumatised our society.

History has shown that unjust laws and actions by governments result in people breaking the law seeking change. Slavery was legal. The Pass Laws in South Africa were a part of a legal system known as apartheid. The Jim Crow laws and segregation in Bermuda were legal. Nelson Mandela, Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King all engaged in illegal protests and went to jail as a result. The Progressive Group went underground to avoid being arrested. The Reverend Kingsley Tweed, a member of the Progressive Group, received death threats and fled Bermuda.

All were protesting against unjust actions of governments. Thomas Jefferson, making a statement in the Declaration of Independence, wrote: “Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it ...”

Nelson Mandela went even further: “It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realised. But, my Lord, if it needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.”

It is the people’s democratic right to object to, and protest against, any law which they feel is detrimental to them.

Curb believes if the Government had listened from the beginning, if democracy and transparency had taken place at every juncture, there would have been no need for people to engage in civil disobedience.

Sadly, the use of the riot squad, force and pepper spray, the threats of Taser use and the carrying of batons have taken this far beyond the airport project and escalated the tension in our society. From social media, it is obvious that many in the community, both black and white, are horrified, pained, dismayed and angered. We urge those who decide to continue to protest to do so peacefully. We urge the police to show the restraint they displayed during the protests in March. Social justice and the constitutional right to protest go hand in hand.

It is likely people will protest again at the House of Assembly on Friday. Many who choose to protest will now do so for other reasons than the airport project, and will be demonstrating against the use of force against non-violent, unarmed protesters.

There is a difference between law and justice; law being the body of rules that govern society, while justice is a standard of morality that determines what is right and what is wrong.

Those who protest are looking for justice. They believe they have a moral responsibility to protest because their viewpoints have not been listened to or taken into consideration and they believe they are being marginalised.

We are on the brink and we must be willing to listen to each other. The focus must now be on a resolution to the increasing tensions. There can be a resolution but it takes people stepping back from their present stances, listening to each other and finding a middle ground. Steps must be taken by those in power to respond to the voices of the protesters.

To that end, Curb recommends:

• Postponement of the present airport legislation due to be put before the House on Friday

• A mediated resolution to the existing impasse

• The promise of a full and proper investigation of social conditions in Bermuda

• A full and independent investigation into the pepper-spraying incident

• Immediate publication of all police protocol and guidelines with regard to the use of riot police, force and/or weapons on unarmed people