Tibet court case postponed in the wake of reopened enquiry – The Post

Tibet court case postponed in the wake of reopened enquiry

There’s been another twist in the saga of Danish police vs pro-Tibet demonstrators during Chinese official visits to Denmark

Who would have thought that a little bit of coloured cloth could cause so much trouble and cost so much public money? (photo: Peter Krefting)
June 20th, 2018 3:15 pm| by Stephen Gadd

The two middle-ranking officers of Copenhagen Police charged with perjury have had their day in court postponed by at least three months.

At a meeting held yesterday it was decided to postpone the pre-trial hearings until September 21, Anders Németh, the defence lawyer for one of the accused, told DR Nyheder.

The two police officers are both pleading not guilty.

Further information on the way
According to Németh, the decision to postpone has been made because last week the Tibet Commission was reconvened with a widened mandate to investigate all official Chinese visits since 1995.

“We’d like to know the Tibet Commission’s game-plan before we consider our position on the hearing,” said Németh.

“There is information on the way that has relevance for the case, so it doesn’t make sense to hold it at the present time,” added Németh.

Flags of (in)convenience
The two police officers have been charged with committing perjury in Copenhagen City Court when giving evidence in a case brought by a number of citizens who alleged that the police wrongfully arrested them during a legitimate demonstration. They also took away Tibetan flags so the Chinese visitors would not see them.

READ ALSO: Lawyer calls police testimony “untrue” in Tibet activist case

In court the officers said that no orders existed instructing them to remove Tibetan flags from demonstrators, but it was later revealed that such an order did exist. This led to the two policemen being censured in the Tibet Committee’s report, as well as the perjury charge.

According to Ekstra Bladet journalists who have seen the charge sheet, the prosecution intends to seek a custodial sentence. However, if the plaintiffs are given a sentence of less than six months, they would be able to serve it at home equipped with electronic tags.