Peace Camps | Military Land Byelaws

A mixed gender weekend peace camp was originally set-up by Otley Peace Action Group (OPAG - played a major role in raising public awareness and protest at MHS in the 1980s) on 29 April 1983 . At least 10 other weekend mixed peace camps were held at MHS by other local peace groups. This eventually led to the setting up of the permanent mixed peace camp in July 1984 , which existed for three and a half years until 1987. The campers provided a focal point for disseminating information about the base to members of the public. They held numerous demonstrations and entered the base on many occasions. There were many arrests and appearances in court. Local peace groups produced many leaflets about the base. OPAG supported the mixed peace camp and did a weekly food run. Many people were regularly supported by OPAG in court. Public meetings and actions at the base were also organised. [ 63 ]

In 1993 Helen John (from Greenham Common Women's Peace Camp) helped establish a monthly weekend peace camp outside Menwith Hill, on the NW corner ('Windy Corner') of the base, near the Main Gate [ 64 ]. A spectacular silver moonbow on the night of 30 January 1994 inspired the name 'Moonbow Corner' for a second campsite on the more visible SE corner of the base alongside the major A59 road. In May 1994 a ten day "Amazon Festival" was attended by over 100 women - despite the rain there were many excursions onto the base. On the last day the sun shone and 6 women stayed on to set up the full-time "Womenwith Hill" peace camp.

On 19 February 1996 Menwith Hill was designated 'RAF' Menwith Hill in order to validate the military byelaws which apply to UK military bases under the Military Lands Act of 1892. Apparently "This was simply an administrative change to bring the base into line with other RAF sites made available by the Ministry of Defence to the United States Government" [ 68 ].

The Military Land Byelaws were first brought in as a reaction to the protest against Cruise missiles at Greenham Common in April 1985 by the then Secretary of State for Defence, Michael Heseltine. The intention was to make trespass a criminal offence and therefore arrestable and so women could be criminalised to stop their actions of resistance. Over the years many hundreds of women were arrested, detained, convicted and imprisoned under these byelaws. On 12 July 1990 , after a four year journey through the courts, starting with the Newbury Magistrates and ending in the House of Lords, the byelaws were held to be 'ultra vires' - outside of the Minister's powers - and, so, 'ab initio' - from the beginning. The Greenham byelaws were adjudged to 'interfere with the rights of common' and so did not affect the status of the byelaws at similar bases.

In the mean-time, in 1991 , the Secretary of State for Defence (then Tom King) tried to sue Lindis Percy for trespass and claimed damages for £11,600 for 'wasting police time' at Menwith Hill. This was the first injunction at Menwith and started as a temporary injunction and lasted for five years before being made permanent in 1996 .

On 28 August 1991 Mr. Justice Cresswell transferred the case from the High Court, where the plaintiffs had started it, to the Harrogate County Court, and from there it was transferred to York (as the facilities at Harrogate were inadequate). Eventually it was heard by Judge Crabtree [ 71 ] in York County Court in July 1993 . Judge Crabtree ruled reluctantly (after an application made by the Secretary of State for Defence) that the case should be sent back to the High Court. In his ruling Judge Crabtree said that if Ms Percy was right in her defence it would have meant that all the agreements and arrangements between the US and British Governments would have to be renegotiated.

When the case eventually came to the High Court in March 1995 , Malcolm Rifkind put on a Public Interest Immunity Certificate [ 72 ], to prevent documents obtained from inside MHS (to prove that the NSA was in occupation) from being submitted and the case had to be conceded. However, a number of documents disclosed as a consequence of this action revealed the history of how a small group of people in London made the decision to hand over vast areas of land to the US visiting forces in the late 40s /early 50s (the "NATO Status of Forces Agreement"). [ 73 ] It was also revealed that the land was compulsorily purchased at the request of the US. Among the secret documents disclosed were details of the 'security of tenure' agreement which allowed the Americans use of the land for 21 years renewable every 21 years on request of the USAF. There were also details of how bases should be referred to as 'RAF' and not USAF.

The byelaws story became tangled when Lindis Percy, John Bugg and Rachel Greaves brought out a Writ against 66 Ministry of Defence Police officers and others for unlawful arrest and detention under the 1986 invalid byelaws. John Bugg died in 1993 after meticulous and significant work challenging military land byelaws. Lindis Percy and Rachel Greaves lost the case after the MOD successfully challenged the Woolf and Pill ruling, which resulted in the 1986 byelaws being declared valid again. An appeal to the House of Lords by Lindis Percy and Rachel Greaves against this ruling could not be pursued because legal aid was denied. This resulted in the somewhat farcical situation whereby the people who had had their convictions quashed should have technically been found guilty again!

In the same court case Tony Benn MP (formerly Secretary of State for Energy and responsible for the UK Nuclear Power programme) testified that Britain is under contract to the US to buy nuclear weapons on the condition that bases like Menwith are allowed to operate from here and on condition that the US controls and has access to all British intelligence operations.

The Ministry of Defence appealed against the 1997 Crabtree decision and this appeal was upheld on 22 January 1999 in the High Court, London, by Judges Buxton and Collins [ 76 ]. They should have sent the original Appeal against MHS byelaws convictions by Anne Lee and Helen John (Menwith Women's Camp) back to the Crown Court to be dismissed and to have both women's convictions re-instated [ 77 ]. After losing in the High Court, the two women notified the Ministry of Defence lawyers that they did not intend to appeal to the House of Lords, but wished to introduce a new line of argument in the lower courts (to examine the powers granted to the Defence Secretary under the Military Lands Act, 1892 - it would be an abuse of process to use an Act of Parliament for a purpose for which it was not intended).

Following the Crabtree ruling, in April 1998 , Lindis Percy was found to be 9 times in breach of the terms of her permanent injunction at Menwith Hill by Judge Carnwath [ 78 ] in the High Court for the unlawful use of the footpath i.e. taking down the declared invalid byelaws signs. Referring to the earlier ruling of Judge Crabtree, Judge Carnwath said, "I cannot conclude that her stance was wholly untenable." He also said, "What cannot be constitutionally acceptable, in my view, is for the Executive to proceed as though it were simply free to disregard a decision of a competent court with which it does not agree ...", he went on to say, "... there was no legal justification for the retention of the byelaw notices; it is an abuse of that power, and therefore unlawful, to put up or maintain notices of bye-laws which are known to be invalid." Judge Carnwath reimposed a six month suspended prison sentence over one year as from that date.

Despite this, byelaws notices were still put up around the base. This did not stop the action against the byelaws, however. In 1999 Lindis Percy was found 'in contempt of court' for being in breach of her permanent injunction at Menwith Hill and sent to prison for 9 months for continuing to pursue her actions against the byelaws. After her release from prison at the end of July she continued to challenge the byelaws by walking on a corner of the base.