OLYMPIC POLICE STATE CASE STUDY: SYDNEY 2000

The 2000 Summer Olympics in Sydney, Australia, offers a useful case-study in regards to police repression due to its similarities to Canada as a former British colony, its low population density (some 20 million), and its high-tech industrialized society. Helen Lenskyj, an Australian citizen based in Toronto, Canada, and author of two books on the Olympic industry and Sidney Games, was in Australia in the year preceding the Games. Her analysis offers valuable insights into the policing operations prior to, and during, the 2000 Games:

“Legislation passed in 1997 & 1998 in New South Wales [NSW, the province/district where Sydney is located] marked the beginning of a new wave of police power over public behavior and peaceful protest. These trends were part of a global pattern directed largely at the mass anti-globalization protests that followed the 1999 Seattle [anti-WTO riots]…

“For more than a year before the Sydney Olympics, protesters were increasingly feeling the impact of state power over public assemblies. Examples included the New South Wales police commissioner’s refusal to authorize several weekday protests in 1999 and, in March 2000, the unprecedented rejection of a route that had been taken by the International Women’s Day marches for decades…

“In June 1999, protesters were the targets of police ‘practise exercises’ for the Olympics, when 400 officers forcibly closed down a relatively small anti-corporate demonstration. The June 18 organizing collective had been under surveillance earlier that year, with undercover police infiltrating its meetings in a Sydney café (June 18, 1999, ‘Reclaim the Streets’, was the date of anti-capitalist protests in mostly W. Europe & N. America; in London, UK, it was a large riot involving thousands in the downtown business district, causing extensive damage to wealthy shops and cars).

“As the Olympics approached, the climate for protest in Sydney became more hostile. In May 2000, sixteen mounted police & dozens of officers on foot dispersed a May Day protest against global corporate power… In August 2000, the NSW Police Service issued a statement that it ‘would not tolerate violent or unlawful activity and will take all appropriate measures to ensure the Olympics are as safe and enjoyable as possible for everyone concerned;’ it claimed, however, that ‘peaceful and law-abiding demonstrations in public areas’ would not be impeded. In reality, the raft of draconian Olympic legislation that had been enacted in the preceding years made it impossible to conduct a ‘law-abiding’ demonstration in almost every part of the central business district, as well as in a number of areas in Sydney’s western and eastern suburbs.”
(“International Olympic Resistance,” by Helen J. Lenskyj, The Global Nexus Engaged, Sixth International Symposium for Olympic Research, p. 205)

“[A]ll venues were designed to maximize crime prevention, with particular attention to surveillance and access control. The main stadium, completed in 1999, had state-of-the-art video surveillance systems that covered every seat, as well as aisles, entrances, and underground tunnels… Thousands of video cameras were installed in all Olympic venues, and areas outside their line of sight were equipped with alarm systems activated by motion, heat, or sound.”
(The Best Olympics Ever? Social Impacts of Sydney 2000, p. 44)

“At the federal level, [the Australian Security Intelligence Organization] ASIO developed the Federal Olympic Security Intelligence Center (FOSIC) in 1999. Staffed by officers from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and officers from all Australian government security agencies, the center operated 24-hours a day during the Olympics…

“The Australian Defense Force’s (ADF) participation in Olympic security involved about 4,000 military personnel, whose Olympic-related duties included searches of venues and vehicles, bomb searches, and bomb disposal… The training of ‘counterterrorism units’, which included mock storming of jumbo jets and police-military searches of motor vehicles, began in early 1999. In May 2000, a 3-day counterterrorist exercise involving the army’s Special Air Service incurred $100,000 in damages to the Blacktown softball stadium… By August 2000, military forces were on 24-hour alert, focusing on 115 places in the city identified as potential terror targets.

“ADF equipment available for Olympic-related use included armored vehicles and Black hawk helicopters, to be used for security tasks and general support. In the months leading up to the Olympics, nighttime helicopter exercises regularly succeeded in keeping thousands of western suburbs and inner-city residents awake…

“The Olympic Security Command Center was set up by the NSW police at SOCOG headquarters in order to coordinate Olympic security, with the police service… taking ultimate responsibility for core security matters at competition venues, the Olympic villages, and the airports. No NSW police officers were permitted to take leave during the Olympics…

“Olympic security plans initially called for 4,500 out of the 13,600 NSW police officers, at a cost of $174 million. This number was later increased to 4,875, following concerns about the poor response to the private security officer recruitment drive. 500 police were required just to protect the athletes’ village, while approximately 3,500 contract security personnel were to be deployed at the venues & villages, and 230 specially trained dogs were to patrol venues & customs areas to detect explosives. An additional 3,500 security personnel were generated by the Olympic Volunteers in Police program, which recruited men & women from the Rural Fire Service, the state Emergency Service…
“Technological and other new equipment purchased by NSW Police in preparation for the Olympics totaled $34.7 million.
(The Best Olympics Ever?, pp. 44-50)

In order to use military forces for Olympic security, the Defense Legislation Amendment (Aid to Civilian Authorities) Act, 2000, was passed, authorizing the government to call out the military to control ‘domestic violence’. It provided the Australian Defense Forces with sweeping powers greater than that of the police, including authorization to search premises without warrants and to detain persons without arrest.
Altogether, nearly 10,000 police & military were deployed for Olympic security, with some 7,000 persons employed as security guards (total: 17,000). Included in this were members of the Special Air Service (SAS), members of which also assisted police in crowd surveillance (just as members of the US Delta force did in Seattle at the anti-WTO protests in 1999).

On the legal front, new laws were passed expanding police powers & limiting civil liberties. These included:

Police & Public Safety Act, introduced in June 1998, permitting police to conduct an electronic or physical search of a person, their bags, or personal effects, in a public space, if the officer had ‘reasonable’ grounds to suspect that the person had a dangerous implement. The Act also increased the power of police to force people out of areas designated as having ‘high-crime rates, or if the person was seen as obstructing, intimidating or harassing other people or traffic. Many targeted under this new provision were youth and Aboriginals.

Protection & Parental Responsibility Act, passed in 1997, similarly expanded police powers to stop & search people, in this case those believed to be 16 years of age or under. Investigations later found that most of those stopped & fined under this act were not only youth, but Aboriginal, poor or sex trade workers.

“Existing public order legislation facilitated the passage of additional laws in 1999 to prepare Sydney for its role as an Olympic city, with the prerequisite constraints on public behaviour. The Homebush Bay Operations Regulation (1999) significantly extended existing police powers, and, more disturbingly, the powers of persons ‘authorized’ by the Olympic Coordination authority, in all the sports grounds at the Homebush Bay Olympic site. These authorized individuals were allowed to remove anyone who contravened the provisions of the regulation, trespassed, or caused ‘annoyance or inconvenience’ within the sports grounds [with no requirement for a warning and the ability to use ‘reasonable’ force]…

“Those charged with trespass would be banned from entering the sports ground for the next twelve months, and, if they did so, or if they were removed a second time, would incur a lifetime ban. Persons charged simply with causing ‘annoyance’ or inconvenience could be banned for up to six months… On short, when authorized officers targeted a particular person, they could call upon a wide range of interpretations, in order to reject or charge that person. Activists wearing the popular “Fuck the Olympics” T-shirts, for example, were likely to be charged under these provisions…

“On the question of public assemblies or processions, the Summary Offenses Act provided for the police commissioner to authorize such gatherings. It was not an offense, however, to participate in an unauthorized assembly; authorization merely gave immunity from future prosecution on the two charges of unlawful assembly and obstruction of traffic…

“The Sydney Harbor Foreshore Authority Regulation (SHFA) 1999, in contrast, demanded that all public assemblies be authorized by the SHFA, which had the power to set dates and conditions, or arbitrarily prohibit the assembly, with no recourse open to the organizers. Thus, the new regulation gave the SHFA greater powers than those of the police commissioner. Venues constructing the harbor foreshore, not coincidently, included the major parks in the CBD that traditionally served as gathering or dispersal points for major political protests. Equally significant was the wide sweep of the SHFA to cover not only the harbor Olympics venues but also major parks, beaches, and recreational areas in the suburbs, up to 10km away from the harbor.”
(The Best Olympics Ever?, pp. 51-55)

Other legislation was enacted prohibiting selling or distributing items within 3km of an Olympic site, and enforcing copyright and trade marks of the Olympics (Olympic Arrangements Act):
“Distribution of unauthorized ‘articles’ including political or other leaflets, was prohibited by the Olympic Arrangements Act, with a fine of up to five thousand dollars.”
(The Best Olympics Ever? p. 58)

According to Lenskyj, some of these laws had sunset clauses and expired at the end of 2000, some had sunset clauses that were to be reviewed after 4 years, while others remained permanent.

One aspect of Olympic security, the legal copyright of Olympic logos & themes, was applied to both commercial businesses and anti-Olympic community groups. In August & September, 2000, the IOC filed lawsuits against over 1800 “registered domain names for alleged infringement of property rights” (The Best Olympics Ever?, p. 168).

These were mostly commercial sites, including porn and gambling sites. In addition, some 20 Internet sites were ordered to remove audio and video clips. Although rationalized as a means to protect the Olympic Industry from commercial exploitation, and to protect its sponsors, community groups were also caught in the net, including Unolympics.org. Although the law-suit against Unolympics.org was not followed up by the IOC, it caused considerable concern among anti-Olympics organizations in Australia.

Sources

Fair Play for Housing Rights; Olympic Games & Housing Rights, Centre on Housing Rights & Evictions, Geneva, Switzerland 2007, www.cohre.org

Inside the Olympic Industry; Power, Politics and Activism, by Helen Jefferson Lenskyj, State University of New York Press, Albany NY 2000

The Best Olympics Ever? Social Impacts of Sydney 2000, by Helen Jefferson Lenskyj, State University of New York Press, Albany NY 2002