Anyone who spends more than a few hours at the St. Paul’s occupation camp is familiar with Dan’s face. Curly dark hair, thin and tallish, with a look which is permanently enthusiastic yet frazzled. Besides his involvement in the livestream working group he tells me he helps out with “the recycling, showing people around the camp, a few internal working groups”. Then he pauses, looks at me and says: “What other working groups am I involved in? I’m involved in quite a bit really”. In addition,n he has stood as a litigant-in-person in the legal case brought by the City of London Corporation against the Occupy London protest camp outside St. Paul’s Cathedral. He is now preparing his appeal.
On the 18th of January, Mr Justice Lindblom ruled in favour of the City of London Corporation, rejecting the defences brought forward by Daniel Ashman and George Barda, the other litigants-in-person. During the court proceedings, Dan had submitted evidence demonstrating “undue influence of corporate lobbying, complicity in war crimes, corporate tax avoidance and disregard for life”, which was rapidly dismissed by the court, as only the geographical factors were taken into consideration. The verdict left Dan, and many others, feeling “failed” by the justice system. However, he has by no means exhausted his hope, determination or resources.
Despite his relatively young age of 27 and legalistic inexperience, his resoluteness in defending Occupy and his unwavering belief in the movement’s core values, make his voice one difficult to ignore. He explains to me: “If we concede our physical presence without exhausting the route of justice, it demonstrates a telling underlying belief that we are unable to genuinely bring about the change we wish to see”. He then adds: “Non-tokenistic action is of the utmost importance. Can we believe in a politicians “Moral Capitalism”? Do they seek peace or believe that there should be peace?”
While his involvement at Occupy LSX is indisputable, Dan doesn’t define himself an activist . “I try and avoid all categorisation, because labeling people de-humanises them”, se says. “I am a human being who is concerned enough to take a stand and who advocates finding a different way”. He has attended a few demonstrations, the first being the ‘million march’ against the Iraq war in 2003, but mainly Dan is concerned with issues related to social justice and inequality.
Prior to the start of the London occupation, he saw himself as having two jobs. A remunerated one – which was working with children with autism – and a voluntary one as part of a comedy sketch group. It is his background in contemporary theatre which propelled him to to begin researching political issues and write plays related to self empowerment. He loves both of his jobs, although he has given them up now, feeling that the most important thing he could be doing for himself and generations to come was to occupy. In his own words: “St Paul’s is one of the most mportant conversations. The chaos is being exported and we are caught in the storm. We don’t feel like we are involved and perhaps we aren’t directly, but through our passiveness we give tacit consent to these actions”.
He decided to stand as a litigant-in-person since he was uncomfortable being “spoken for”. The feeling of unease was bolstered when he heard one of the country’s most prominent humanitarian barristers, John Cooper QC, was defending the camp pro-bono. “For me, the whole point of being here is speaking for yourself. This isn’t about anyone’s personal greatness. Only if we take a stance as individuals with our own power can we bring change to our lives”. This has been the beginning of Dan’s journey into the unknown.
He admits to me: “I am not a legal person, and I had never been in a court room before.” Yet his tone is neither agitated nor nervous, but one of playful defiance, perhaps peppered with a hint of madness. When Daniel initially stood as a litigant-in-person, he could have potentially lost a sum ranging between £30,000 and £100,000 in legal costs . Eventually these charges were dropped, as the City of London Corporation sought to speed up the legal process. In addition to the possible financial hardship, this experience has been tolling on the relationship with his fiancèe, who he now sees once a week. He confesses: “Initially it was difficult for her. But she knows why I am here and she recognizes the potential I see in this movement”. But what would have happened in case you had to pay legal costs? “Costs are simply a way to instill fear into people seeking justice, it’s a way of financial bullying”, Dan responds.
When explaining the whole process, what he emphasises is the feeling of empowerment, partly bolstered by the opportunity of holding prominent people within the corporate ladder to account. For example, Dan was able to directly question comptroller Andrew Colvin as to the reasons why he had not responded to the counter-offer made by the St. Paul’s occupation. This offer proposed that the City of London Corporation opened their account to scrutiny, thus making themselves subject to the Freedom of Information Act and publishing their records since 2008. Grinning, he adds, “he couldn’t really come up with a convincing answer”.
In the span of few months, Dan underwent a ‘transition’ from ordinary, concerned citizen to full time occupier. But what has motivated such a life change? “The lack of fear” says Dan, smiling through his eyes. He then explains how the physical manifestation of St. Paul’s and the permanent nature of the camp bolstered his confidence in being pro-active and finding concrete alternatives.
Now occupiers are bracing themselves for a potential forceful eviction. Dan, like many others in the camp, advocates a ‘peaceful resistance’. He says: “It does not seem just to impede a process that so many have been waiting for”. But he also recognizes the need to keep the momentum alive. The court verdict pushed occupiers to begin thinking creatively in regards to the future of the movement. According to Dan, “if there is a eviction it is not the end by any stretch of the imagination, nor should it be. The goals we have set are not even close to being realized.” While Dan is still uncertain in regards to the concrete future manifestations of Occupy, there is no doubt in his mind about the overall outcome of the occupy process: “I hope to see respect for people’s lives regardless of their financial value”.
By Flamia Giambalvo
