_admin_ – Page 5 – Public Space Tools

WikiTankers

Posted on 16 May 201514 February 2022 by _admin_

As part of the Collective Construction in the Social Space workshop series organised by ACVic, this workshop was based on networked creative practices and self-managed collaborative strategies that seek to intervene in social processes through alternative citizen-focused systems.

The workshop aimed to design and construct street furniture elements that can activate and equip communal spaces. It also offered an opportunity to rethink the whole concept of street furniture. Similarly to the small, movable items that organise and equip our homes and workplaces, items of “furniture” are also used to organise and fit out communal or public spaces. Workshop participants explored the concept of street furniture from the perspective that its meaning can be as broad as we are capable of making or imagining it, and that our desires in relation to the city can be embodied in devices that are catalysts for social life: from guerrilla kitchens to media tanks, which can quickly transform any corner of the city into a party, a forum or a theatre, and promote its connection to communication networks.

The workshop built on work that had been carried out in Spring 2011 with members of La Torratxa self-managed social centre and the 15M movement in Vic. It was also based on a study of instances of non-regulated uses of urban public space, spanning from spontaneous artistic actions to citizen mobilisations, self-managed recycling projects and the fitting out of unoccupied urban sites.

Five mobile devices were designed and built during the workshop:

> Gastrotanker > the kitchen

> Agrotanker > the urban kitchen garden that complements and supplies the kitchen

> Mediatanker > technology hub, Wi-Fi Internet connection, communication, media, etc.

> Barratanker > bar/meeting point that complements the Mediatanker or Gastrotanker with extra furniture units

> Infotanker > made in response to a request for a new information point by members of Occupy Vic.

Each of these devices was made using customised dumpster bin adapted to fit the different uses. Before construction began, participants went on material recovery expeditions to municipal warehouses, rubbish dumps and scrap yards, which meant that most of the material employed to make the units was recycled. The finishing touch was to unify all of the prototypes using a single graphic style and colour.

The following describes how the Agrotanker and the Mediatanker were made:

AGROTANKER

The Agrotanker garden unit was intended to complement the kitchen, so it includes vegetables and herbs as well as decorative plants. As it was important to ensure that the unit would be relatively autonomous in terms of watering, the design included a series of water deposits that hang above the soil surface in such a way that the water pressure allows the plants to be watered. Nozzles placed on the ends of the tubes attached to the deposit made it possible for the water to reach the soil drop by drop. We also discovered the potential added value of the horizontal tube, and decided to install a manual foot pump to make the best of this. By means of manual pressure applied to the foot pump, the pressurized air inside the tube forces the water through the nozzles and allows users to cool themselves with a refreshing mist when temperatures get very hot. The existing assembly system of the metal profiles we recycled means that the structure that holds the deposits in place on the side of the container is detachable. Meanwhile, recycled road cones were turned upside down and transformed into planter boxes, which were the signature detail that set the Agrotanker apart from the other units.

Inventory:

Method:

1. -The dumpster bin

First, we reduced the size of the container to around 90 cm in order to make it easier for users of the device to reach and use it. We cut the actual side of the dumpster down to 90 cm and then reinforced it by attaching some 1 cm thick Trespa strips to the plastic with rivets. This gave us a total thickness of around 20 mm. Then we perforated the base of the container at the lowest points were water would build up, in order to allow it to drain.

2.-Structure of the deposits

The next step was to plan and build the structure to hold up the watering deposits. We decided to take advantage of some metal profiles we had recycled, which were designed to fit together. We cut them to size and welded them to create the upper (visible) structure. We also cut two more sections and attached them to one of the sides of the dumpster by means of fixed screws. The upper part fits into the lower part, and is held together with another screw. This makes it quite strong and allows it to be dismantled. The soil and gravel will also strengthen the structure and make it more stable, preventing the profiles from moving around too much.

3.-The planter-cones

We attached the cones on two sides: they were screwed into the upper side of the dumpster, and attached to the side using screw rods and nuts so that they would remain vertical. The way the rods are placed means that the cones can be detached, making it easier to transport the unit.

4.-The clear tubes

The watering tubes and the horizontal tube were put together in the same way. First we cut them to the required size, and then we cut circular stoppers out of foam to the required diameter. We made holes for the tubes to fit into, and then attached the other necessary pieces (taps, etc.)

Two metal rings made out of aluminium sheeting were used to attach the horizontal tube to the container at the desired height. The vertical tubes hang from the structure on metal hooks.

5.-The paint

Once we had attached all the structural, fixed elements, we removed or covered the parts that we didn’t want to paint, and then let loose with an air compressor and paint gun. First the primer and then the finishing coat, in this case glossy red.

6.-The plants

To finish off, only the most important thing was missing: the contents! Thinking in construction terms, in order to avoid filling the whole container with soil and to be resource-efficient, we created a kind of formwork using a plastic drum cut in half, empty water bottles, and unused pieces of tubes. This allowed us to raise the floor level while minimising the weight as much as possible. Then came a layer of geotextile, then volcanic gravel, geotextile again, and the substratum, to a total thickness of about 40 cm (10 + 30). We followed the same procedure for the planter-cones. Once the plants were in the soil, the watering tubes were arranged on the surface.

THE MEDIATANKER

Like all the other units (except the Agrotanker), the Mediatanker was designed to be fully compactable for ease of storage in. This meant that any elements attached to the dumpster ideally had be removable and storable inside it, so that the whole unit would take up the minimum space possible, which is the space of the actual container. The main purposes of the Mediatanker are to provide free, open Internet access and computer and audiovisual support and functionalities to citizens in public space. It is a media-hub that can be used for all kind of related purposes, from DJ sets to projections, visuals, WI-FI, public Internet hub, communication, etc. The person operating the Mediatanker equipment works inside the dumpster, entering through the back. Inside the container there is a folding chair and a board on which to place a PC, for example. Another board attached to the lid of the dumpster can be used to hold music and video equipment. The technological equipment is fragile and sensitive to water and heat, so we included a small roof to cover the unit, which can also be used to hold a projector for outdoor screenings. This roof is placed on tubes that are attached to the container. It can be dismantled so that the unit can be closed and all the material placed inside. In this case, the finishing touch was a pair of tubular sections to hold the speakers in place….

Inventory:

Method:

1. -The interior

The first thing we did was cut the wooden counter to fit the base of the container and then place it inside, so as to provide a floor. Two more sections had to be cut and placed inside to cover the whole surface.

2. -The container

No significant changes were made to the container itself, only a section of the back was cut to make an entrance for the Mediatanker operator. Metal hinges were attached to create a kind of door.

3.- The roof and its structure

We welded the three 6 x 6 tubular sections into a U-shape and attached them to the container. To make the roof surface, we used a grid structure made out of metal tubes. We cut it to the desired shape, and then attached the plastic sheet to it with rivets, and used the wooden slat to cap it. Then we screwed two more 4 x 4 metal profiles were onto the grid. These fit into the 6 x 6 profiles, and meant that the roof could be dismantled.

4.- Fit-out

The furnishing elements that would go inside the container were created at the same time as the structure, although they were not placed inside until the very end.

5.-The paint

Once all the structural, fixed elements were had been assembled, we removed or covered all the parts that we didn’t want to paint, and then let loose with the air compressor and paint gun. First the primer, and then the coat of paint that will provide the finish, in this case, glossy red.

6.-Details

Once all the pieces were made and the tank was painted, we assembled all the elements and for the finishing touch, we attached the loudspeakers. It should be noted that the Mediatanker is a work in progress, and there are plans to continue to optimise it. On the day we presented all the units, we didn’t have light, or a projector… but even so, the effect was awesome!

(descriptions of the assembly process by: Marta Carrasco, Mixit[é])

credits:

workshop directed by: David Juárez (straddle3) and Diego Peris (todo por la praxis), with the collaboration of Santiago Cirugeda and Daniel Miracle

participants: Alba Gou, Albert Castells, Ana Feijão, Ana Raquel Cevallos, Ana Rita Rabaça, Angela Pachón, Antonia Suñer, Arnau Roquer, Catarina Cabral, David Martí, David Orriols, Dolça Grabulòs, Eduard Grabulòs, Enric Sánchez, Eva Reyes, Francisco Esteva, Germán Castro, John Alejandro Rico, Jordi Farrés, José Milara, Juan Martin, León Arellano, Marta Carrasco, Mia Guiteres, Monica Prats, Paula Andrea Bermúdez, Sergi Selvas Gardeñas, Unai Reglero, Xavier Manzanares and Yaiza García.

production: ACVic Centre d’Arts Contemporànies. materials research coordinated by Ana Rita Rabaça and Catarina Cabral.

Thanks to: Carles Arumí, Bruna Dinarés, Centre Social Autogestionat La Torratxa, Acampada de Vic, TC Torelló, Deixalleria de Vic.

more info:

planchas_01.indd

http://straddle3.net/constructors/projects/74.en.php

Turkey’s controversial security bill explained in 7 points

Posted on 5 May 201514 February 2022 by _admin_

The AKP government is currently pushing the bill, which it has renamed as the “Legal Package To Protect Freedoms,” after postponing parliamentary debate on the matter twice. The government says the police need more powers to preserve public order and the safety of citizens, particularly on the eve of elections scheduled for June. They claim that more peaceful protests turn violent with the increasing use of Molotov cocktails and are also concerned about the recent spread of bonzai, a synthetic drug.

All opposition parties, on the other hand, have pledged to prevent the bill from becoming law, arguing that it would give draconian powers to the police. Their criticism is focused on the claim that the government designed the bill to suppress free speech rights by justifying future crackdowns on secondary threats.

After some ruling party deputies signaled that the bill might be “moderated” during parliamentary sessions, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan took a staunch line on Feb. 20, vowing that it “will pass one way or another.”

But what kind of changes will the bill bring? And how do the government and opposition parties support or oppose these changes?

Here is an explanation in seven points:

1) Strip search, car search

Anti-terror police reportedly found bombs in the trunk of a car from Syria in the southeastern Turkish province of Gaziantep in April 2014

How it is now: Since 2007, Turkish police have not had the legal authority to conduct strip searches or searches on a car’s trunk and interior without the approval of a judge or prosecutor.

How it will be: A police chief who is assigned by the highest administrative chief, such as the provincial governor, will be able to order a strip search or a car search. Judges and prosecutors will be bypassed at this stage.

Government: This change is in line with the European Union acquis communitaire. The person who is subjected to a search will be notified by the police in written form, which would then be approved or canceled by a court. This is a control mechanism stronger than the current system.

Opposition: For 24 hours, any person in Turkey will be at the mercy of the police. He or she will be deprived of their legal right to object to the practice of the police during a tense situation in which their human rights will be more vulnerable to violations. If police abuse their power with arbitrary measures, it will be too late for the judiciary to protect a citizen’s rights.

2) 48-hour detention

How it is now: According to the current Turkish Penal Code, only the judiciary can detain a person to take him or her into custody. And the police can take testimonies only in the police center.

How it will be: The bill gives the police the right to detain a person if it deems the situation as in flagrante delicto. Officers will be able to keep him or her in custody for 24 hours without seeing a judge. This period will be extended to 48 hours, if the police deem that there is a “collective crime.” The police will also be able to take testimonies of witnesses and victims at their homes or offices.

Government: Currently, police are not able to detain a person even when they catch a thief in a house. This is a power that all police forces in European countries have. With the new law, only police chiefs, who are assigned by the highest administrative chief, will be able to order detentions and only when the situation is in flagrante delicto.

Opposition: According to CHP deputy Rıza Türmen, a former judge of the European Court of Human Rights, “the police only catch, not detain.” The right to freedom can only be limited by giving the citizen legal guarantees and under the oversight of the judiciary, he says, stressing that the police cannot judge based on “criminal suspicion.”

3) Removing from the scene

Hundreds of protesters were detained during the demonstrations to protect Istanbul’s Gezi Park in June 2013

How it is now: The current law on the authority of the police (PVSK) states the categories of people that security forces are legally entitled to ‘catch’ (a prosecutor can then order them to be ‘detained,’ while only a court can ‘arrest’ them).

How will it change: Besides “catching” them, the bill gives the police the authority to “remove” such people. Moreover, “those who risk the safety of others” have been added to the list as another category.

Government: The police need preventive powers, but it will never be accusing a protester of possible provocation and removing or her from the scene with no reason. The British police have a similar legal authority.

Opposition: The police will be able to “kidnap” people from protests and demonstrations. The bill does not state how and where the “removed” people will be kept by the police. How they will be protected from possible abuses is another question. For instance, if an innocent young woman in a protesting crowd is singled out by a policeman and taken into a forest, what would happen?

4) Using firearms

Gezi protester Ethem Sarısülük was killed by a policeman in Ankara on June 14, 2013

How it is now: The current PSVK limits the cases in which the police are legally allowed to use firearms.

How it will be: The police will be able to use firearms against those who “use or attempt to use Molotov cocktails, as well explosives, inflammables, incendiaries, suffocating devices, or injurious or similar arms.”

Government: Molotov cocktail attacks increased from 472 to 1,994 between 2009 and 2014, killing three policemen and four citizens in the past six years. The bill is more about classifying Molotov cocktails as a weapon, just like Germany, the U.S. and the U.K. do. Just as police do not now resort to their firearms against everyone who carries a gun, they would not do so in the future against everyone who carries a Molotov cocktail. And when they do, the bill states that their response should be proportionate only to neutralize the attack.

Opposition: Brace for more “extrajudicial executions” and police brutality, as even a stick can be considered “injurious.” The European Court of Human Rights seriously limits the police’s use of firearms even in the situations of self-defense. The bill will worsen the current problem, related to the use of police force in Turkey, where a police officer shot dead unarmed Gezi protester Ethem Sarısülük in 2013, only to sentenced to a light sentence of just eight years in prison.

5) No masks, no slings

As the “slingshot auntie” of Gezi protesters, Emine Cansever had attracted worldwide fame thanks to this photograph from veteran AFP photographer Bülent Kılıç taken during the mass demonstrations in Istanbul in spring 2013. AFP photo

How it is now: Article 34 of Turkey’s Constitution grants the right to demonstrate peacefully without prior permission. Law 2911, however, states that demonstrators should notify administrative authorities, like the governor’s office, at least 48 hours before the event, allowing Turkish governments to use the term “unpermitted” demonstration.

How it will be: The bill makes key amendments to two articles of Law 2911. The first one classifies slingshots, iron pellets and fireworks as arms. The second amendment stipulates prison sentences of up to four years for those who participate in a demonstration with these “arms” or with their faces covered fully or partly. Another change stipulates a prison sentence of up to three years for those who participate in a demonstration with the emblem, sign or uniform of an “illegal organization.”

Government: Some protesters have been using slingshots like “catapults” and iron pellets as their shells. Several policemen and civilians have been injured as a result. Meanwhile, organizations like the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) and the Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party-Front (DHKP-C) have been staging parades with their uniforms and the public conscience was hurt that the police could not intervene to stop them.

Opposition: The only condition for the police to intervene to stop a protest should be the use of violence. Covering your face or wearing a uniform can be forms of expression, but not violence. Moreover, will the police detain a child for carrying a sling in a crowd? The bill’s criteria are vague and open to abuse of power.

6) More power to civil servants

In 2013, then-Adana Governor Hüseyin Avni Coş admitted that he called a protester ‘gavat,’ which means pimp in Turkish, triggering public outcry

How it is now: Current laws and regulations give relatively broad powers to elected local officials, like mayors and prosecutors over matters about public order.

How it will be: Administrative chiefs who are appointed by the government, like governors, will assume some of the powers of prosecutors, like being able to issue orders for the police to investigate a crime and find the culprits. They also get the authority to use all publicly owned vehicles for public order and security. Any public servant who does not comply with their orders can be jailed from three months to one year in prison, the bill says.

Government: The Kurdish problem-focused Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) mayors in the southeast have recently prevented fire trucks from being used to disperse fires during violent protests. The bill is designed to prevent a repeat.

Opposition: Transfer of power from prosecutors to administrative chiefs is against the Constitution. If the bill passes into law, a governor will be able to send a mayor to jail for not providing riot control vehicles (TOMA) with water.

7) 48-hour wiretapping

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been accusing the Gülen movement, his ally-turned-nemesis, of conducting illegal wiretappings

How it is now: In urgent situations, the current law allows Turkish security forces to conduct intelligence wiretapping for 24 hours without a judge’s permission.

How it will be: The bill increases the time limit to 48 hours. It also stipulates that the wiretapping official should notify superiors, but only the Ankara Court of Serious Crimes will be authorized to decide whether the wiretapping will continue or not.

Government: The changes are designed to stop ill-intentioned and abusive wiretappings. The increased level of control will make arbitrary decisions harder. To specify a single court to oversee these activities will make the control more efficient and systematized.

Opposition: More arbitrary wiretappings will be seen as the permitted time is increased. With this change, the government is trying to exert full control over wiretappings, stopping those that would hurt their interests, such as investigations into their officials implicated in corruption probes, and making longer wiretappings with no court order against their political opponents.

Original content at: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/explained-turkeys-controversial-security-bill.aspx?pageID=238&nID=78658&NewsCatID=339