I've already agreed to your premise around private property, why don't you consider my premise which is different?
I shall read up again on the UN's declarations. I admit it's been quite a few years for me.
Since the local police are an arm of local government, police corruption is the same as government support. When the next level of police hierarchy at the state government level also decides not to respond, then that's government support at the state level. As I said elsewhere, look into the complaints of the civil right's era and how state government's ignored crimes on the black communities.
An officer of the law refusing to enforce the law is incompetence, abuse of authority, or corruption. Executive branch incompetence, even criminal incompetence, is something distinctly different than legislative proscriptions that institutionalize through the power of law unwarranted interference in freedom of expression.
There is no need to label all these problems as instances of infringement on freedom of speech in order to argue that they are inappropriate. They are inappropriate all on their own. Mislabeling them just confuses the discussion.
The UN Article 19 does not disagree with me, it's also about non government intervention.
Local police corruption is not the same thing as government support. Those incidents are examples of local corruption, not government sanctioned oppression, and they are being addressed and that will take years to play out to see how the state responds.