Blame”

But Government Criticis

Police “Not TO Blame”

For Suva Riot[?]

Prom a Staff Correspondent!

The Suva police were not

hasty in tossing smoke gren

nor were they provocative

the afternoon of Decemb last year when the Suva broke out.

The oil workers strike, wl led up to the riots, was the suit of “frustration felt by union members at their inatr to progress with negotiate which they had been tryiru bring about . . . for some c siderable time and with patiev THESE are among the pri. points made in the repo Chief Justice A. G. Lowe inquiry into the immediate « and events which took plac tween December 7-12.

The report was released ini on May 16.

The Chief Justice was appi in January as the sole meml a commission to investigate disturbances. He sat for five until March 4, during whii heard evidence from 105 witi resulting in 1,400 pages of script being taken down.

The disturbances were assc with a strike by Shell and Vi Oil company employees who members of the Wholesale an tail General Workers’ Union In detailing the events o strike, the report says that: result of the frustration fc members of the union at tin. ability to progress with negot: it was “not unnatural tha union executive felt, after what they could for four n to get negotiations started! they could not succeed with wage claims to any reas degree unless they took df immaterial action, which thi at a time when they were ret at their treatment by the oii panics”.

Entitled to Strike

“It cannot be questioned: report asserts, “that legally entitled to strike v warning; there was and is : in existence to the contrary. 5 .

Other points made: • Low wages brought aboc satisfaction.

(Continued on page 149)

a Government statement which jthat the strike should never jtaken place inflamed the union, statement was prepared by the rfissioner of Labour who was in possession of all the facts. statement was not wisely 'sd.

The distribution of petrol with • assistance and its availability „ not only to essential services, jaken by the union as Govern support for the employers.

Though there was no evidence nolence or intimidation by lists, there was clear evidence b group of known criminals was Hly to Union Secretary Anthony Jthat this group was assisting inion by intimidation of petrol on operators and transport irs.

It was clear that the Govern had not made careful plans netrol distribution and essential r;port. Its breakdown further tiraged the union to take fger action towards bringing go a standstill. The police, how had made careful plans, but had only limited manpower.

"Wide Sympathy"

The strike and the union had ' sympathy with the low-wage :ers amongst whom, the Com lon’er found, there were people in genu i n e hardship, ipathy for the strike was a lead i cause for the large assembly eople in Rodwell Road to hear Anthony speak on the after i of December 9.

'When the police refused per lion for him to speak, on the mds that tension was building land they were right in doing —there was resentment by the d. The criminal element was to “get” the police, and they ,:ed the stone throwing well be any smoke bombs were thrown.

The crowd was given ample :iing that it constituted an illegal mbly—through the use of loud ker announcements. It refused [iisperse and in fact closed in ithe police. There was a real :ger that if smoke bombs had '"’then been thrown —1 h to 21 lutes after the last warning—the police might well have been •whelmed by the mob of up to 3 and a complete state of law less precipitated.

Much of the damage to windows prop e r t y—it amounted to 500—was done at first by the final element who were angered lot having “got” the police. Later nage was done also by youths » were encouraged by the final element.

“There was a very pronounced

anti-European feeling throughout the disturbances” mamly by the criminal element, perhaps e gendered by the ‘hat peans own the largest P. bringing iu tnxips v

« Wing

Voubie” 1 wattle

mpfhods employed on behalf of the union. Whilst frequently declaring nnhiiriv that he wished to keep his strikers wflhin the law, Mr. Anthony had the support of other “strong arm” men who were prepared to break the law to assist the union.

Mr Justice Lowe makes only an oblique reference to Communism. He says Mr. Anthony was asked during the inquiry whether he was “a Communist sympathiser”, and he had answered that he was “not a member of the Communist party”. The Commissioner adds the methods employed in the disturbances “are all too familiar to any reader of world news to need any comment b V me”

The report concludes with this tribute to the police handling of events- “The Police Force, which proved itself to be of very high calibre, carried out an extremely difficult duty with considerable fortitude and indeed, the riot squads did so with bravery; the evidence in that respect is quite overwhelming.”