Key Takeaways
- A series of vandalism attacks were carried out by the activist group Tāmaki for Palestine in Auckland, targeting government offices and political figures.
- The attacks, which involved splashing red paint or fake blood, were in response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the New Zealand government’s stance on the issue.
- Three individuals, including a practising barrister and a lawyer’s co-defendant, were involved in the attacks and have been convicted.
- The court heard that the defendants’ actions were motivated by a deep belief in justice and frustration with the government.
- The attacks were planned and coordinated through an encrypted messaging app, and the defendants took steps to conceal their identities and avoid detection.
Introduction to the Vandalism Spree
The year 2023 saw a series of vandalism attacks carried out by the activist group Tāmaki for Palestine in Auckland. The attacks, which involved splashing red paint or fake blood on government offices and political figures, were in response to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the New Zealand government’s stance on the issue. The group’s actions were widely condemned, and three individuals, including a practising barrister and a lawyer’s co-defendant, have been convicted in connection with the attacks. One of the defendants, Lynch, was found to have played a key role in orchestrating the attacks, and his lawyer, Ron Mansfield, KC, told the court that his actions were a reflection of his deep belief in justice and frustration with the government.
The Attacks and Their Targets
The vandalism spree began in November 2023, with the targeting of the United States Consulate and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade offices in Auckland Central. The group, which called itself Tāmaki for Palestine, issued a press release taking responsibility for the attacks, explaining that the paint was intended to "make the blood on US and New Zealand officials’ hands visible". The attacks continued over the next two months, with the group targeting the Auckland offices of National’s Luxon, Judith Collins, Simon Watts, Paul Goldsmith, and Daniel Bidois, as well as a sign belonging to Act leader David Seymour. The final act of vandalism occurred in January 2024, when Collins’ Papakura office was hit again. The group showed off its illegal handiwork on Instagram, and the attacks were widely reported in the media.
The Investigation and Convictions
The police investigation into the attacks led to the execution of a search warrant at the Onehunga home of the three defendants on February 15 last year. The search uncovered a trove of incriminating information, including data from Swedlund’s phone, which showed that all three defendants had participated in a Tāmaki for Palestine chat group on the encrypted messaging app Signal. The trio’s messages included detailed planning for "hitting National offices", including how to conceal "incriminating evidence" and how each participant should disguise themselves with "anonymity materials". The police also found red paint at the home, including on Lynch’s shoes, and homemade signs saying things such as "f*** National", "expel the Israeli ambassador", and "no genocide on Palestine". The evidence led to the conviction of the three defendants, with Swedlund being convicted earlier in the year.
The Motivations Behind the Attacks
The court heard that the defendants’ actions were motivated by a deep belief in justice and frustration with the government. Lynch’s lawyer, Ron Mansfield, KC, told the court that his client’s actions were a reflection of his passion for justice and his frustration with the government’s stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Judge Belinda Sellars, KC, said that Lynch’s "passion drove the offending", and that his actions were not justified by his beliefs. The case highlights the complexities of political activism and the need for individuals to express their views within the bounds of the law.
The Impact of the Attacks
The vandalism attacks carried out by Tāmaki for Palestine had a significant impact on the community, with many people condemning the group’s actions as unacceptable and counterproductive. The attacks also raised questions about the limits of free speech and the role of political activism in a democratic society. The case serves as a reminder that while individuals have the right to express their views and protest against government policies, they must do so within the bounds of the law and without resorting to violence or vandalism. The convictions of the three defendants serve as a deterrent to others who may be tempted to engage in similar actions, and highlight the importance of respecting the rule of law and the rights of others.