return to press releases

IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE

8 April 2005

DEMOCRATIC RIGHTS TO PROTEST CURTAILED IN THE PRE-ELECTION PARLIAMENTARY ‘WASH-UP’

One of the last acts of the government before dissolution has been to severely curtail the democratic right of individuals to protest at the geographical heart of government.

In the just passed Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill, clauses relating to ‘behaviour in the vicinity of Parliament’ (129-135) were primarily aimed at removing Brian Haw, the Parliament Square peace protestor, who has spent nearly 4 years in a continuous anti-war protest vigil opposite the Houses of Parliament (1). Other measures have also been included that could have wide-ranging implications on protest elsewhere (2).

Tony Benn, who has supported Mr Haw over the years, said that, “The clamping of political debate in Parliament Square to silence the voices of opposition represents a leap backwards to a pre-democratic age.”

With the dissolution of Parliament imminent, remaining business there is dealt with in a ‘wash-up’ period in which the parties negotiate so that bills can be processed very quickly. The highly controversial religious hatred clauses were struck so that the rest of the bill could be passed.

However, many other controversial clauses saw almost no debate in either chamber, partly due to lack of time, despite many concerns that the legislation should be postponed because of the ‘very serious, contentious and important’ implications for individual rights of assembly (3). Baroness Shirley Williams said it was ‘bizarre’ and ‘ironic’ that such rights to protest are ‘praised in the Lebanon, in the Ukraine, in Kyrgyzstan and elsewhere’ but ‘we are now beginning to make (them) almost impossible in our own country.’ (4) Other MPs had previously pointed out how unworkable the laws will be and how peaceful protestors could easily become criminalised by breaching them in circumstances that are not in their control (5).

Mr Haw’s protest has been accepted as lawful since he won his landmark High Court case in October 2002 (6), necessitating the government pass new legislation to remove him. In the process of limiting his and others’ free speech in Parliament Square, the Government have taken the opportunity to place severe restrictions on protest in a very wide area around Parliament, which will seriously curtail the rights of everyone to protest in Central London, whatever the issue. (7)

In response to the new legislation, Mr Haw, who currently remains in Parliament Square, said, ‘Genocide, or crying out against it, which is the crime? Mr Blair is ushering in an increasingly Orwellian state. My concern is for the children suffering in Iraq as a result of British policy. That is why I have been here over 1400 days.’

Demonstrators will now have to give 6 days notice (or 24 hours if not ‘reasonably practical’ to give 6 days) to the Metropolitan Commissioner, who will say whether a protest may go ahead and, if so, under what restrictions. Such unworkable restrictions include how many people may turn up and how many placards they may carry. Restrictions may be placed if the protest is seen as likely to cause a ‘disruption to the life of the community’. As most protest causes some disruption by its very nature, this law will have wide-ranging implications. A single police office may be able to change any of the restrictions at the time of the protest, creating further impediments to peaceful assembly. The restrictions will apply to any protest within 1km of Parliament Square, covering all government buildings and much else besides. The penalties for breaching the restrictions are severe – up to a year in prison and substantial fines. The Human Rights organisation Liberty, say that they cannot see how these measures ‘can be compatible with Article 11 of the Human Rights Act (the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association).” (8)

For more information contact info@parliament-square.org.uk, www.parliament-square.org.uk

Notes:

1. Brian Haw has been in Parliament Square continuously since 2nd June 2001 in protest against the US/UK support of economic sanctions in Iraq, the invasion of Iraq and the on-going ‘war on terror’.
2. The Bill introduces new circumstances for trespass and harassment, and police powers, that further criminalise peaceful protest. www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1419842,00.html
3. Lord Stoddart, see http://tinyurl.com/6zwqt
4. See http://tinyurl.com/62j6e
5. See www.parliament-square.org.uk/defend.htm#mps
6. On 4th October 2002 Westminster City Council's High Court proceedings against him for obstruction of the highway were dismissed on the grounds that Brian was exercising his freedom of expression and assembly under the Human Rights Act.
7. See the text of the Bill: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pabills.htm
8. See www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/right-to-protest.shtml