We fought and beat the government in the courts because every Briton has the right to protest
When we beat the Conservative government over its anti-democratic protest laws in court last year, we thought that would be the end of the story. Judges in the high court had made it very clear that laws that gave the police almost unlimited powers to crack down on any protest that caused 'more than minor' disruption were unlawful. It ordered that the laws should be scrapped. We celebrated. Given that the incoming Labour government had voted down these very same laws a year earlier, we believed that protest would be taken out of the culture wars arena and put back into the sacred space of fundamental rights.
Yet Labour dragged us back to court, in a misguided attempt to be seen to look tough on public order. And now today, on a day of much Labour soul-searching, we've won again. A unanimous court of appeal victory that, alongside chastening election results, must now trigger a total Labour rethink on how we treat protesters in this country.
Five different judges over two separate hearings have made it clear: these anti-protest laws were a flagrant abuse of power and quite simply should never have existed. Ministers cannot step outside the law to do whatever they want to shut down causes they don't agree with.
These laws we defeated today were introduced in a toxic climate. The previous government made it its mission to stifle protest movements it didn't like. Even when this regulation itself was created, the Conservative government specifically named climate protesters as those they were targeting, even though the change in law impacted everybody. This is a dangerous way to do politics, and has led to hundreds of protesters being wrongly arrested under a law that should never have been created in the first place. Whether or not you agree with a protest cause – environmental justice, Palestine solidarity, farmers' inheritance tax, the closure of your local library – laws that chip away at protest do damage to them all.
The 'more than minor' regulations are just one of many laws the last Conservative government created that narrowed the space for protest in this country. In the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, laws were created that were so broad that a protest could be shut down for simply being too 'noisy'. In 2023, the Conservative government's Public Order Act went even further, and brought in powers that have led to arrests for carrying any material that might be used to lock on, a common tactic used throughout history (such as by the Suffragettes), even if an act of protest has not happened yet. Things have shifted so much that we're now in the farcical situation in which protesters in many cases are now unable to tell a judge about why they protested in the first place.
These laws are far reaching and have real consequences. A record number of protesters spent last Christmas in prison because of anti-protest laws. Journalists have been wrongly caught up covering protests and wrongfully held in custody because police assumed they were protesters. This is unsustainable, and is damaging the basic principles of our free speech and democracy in this country.
And the assault continues. Going through parliament right now is a proposal to ban the use of face coverings at protests – a plan Labour has copied almost word for word from a bill the Conservatives introduced last year. What message does this send to those who rely on face masks to protest safely, such as Hong Kong dissidents who want to protest outside the Chinese embassy, or disabled activists protesting cuts in their benefits?
Today's ruling shows that the previous government's approach was wrong – and now the Labour government must learn from its predecessors' mistakes and change tack.
This should serve as a wake-up call for Labour. It must accept this ruling and scrap the laws for good. We now urgently need a review of all the hundreds of arrests that happened under this law. And we need a complete review of all protest legislation that was made over the past few years.
Quite simply, we need a new approach. Protesting brought us votes for women, the right to a weekend and Pride. Surely, that alone is reason enough to stop playing politics with the right to protest, and get back to being a country that is serious about protecting democratic freedoms.
Akiko Hart is the director of the human rights organisation Liberty
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
an hour ago
- Sky News
Ballymena riots: Families flee 'locals' venting their feelings
Here we go again. It was not long after 8pm when a police announcement over a tannoy mounted on their armoured vehicles reverberated around for all to hear. "Force is about to be used against violent individuals," blasted from the speakers as locals, some masked, stood waiting for action. "You better be filming this," one man said as we captured the scenes for Sky News amid a growing sense from locals that the police were being heavy handed in their tactics. And then officers, holding their shields, surged forward as people edged back. The move seemed to further anger the residents who had gathered, almost goading them as tensions ran high. The pace of clashes was slower on this, the third night of conflict. But it was nevertheless just as ugly and messy. Eyewitness: It is hard to see where the violence will end Soon came the baton rounds, the firebombs, the water cannon. Those pelting the police seemed unfazed as they were battered with plastic bullets in return. The watching crowd cheered the rioters on. Police chiefs earlier defended their operation. A senior officer insisted he did have "a grip" on the unravelling situation when questioned by Sky News. The increased presence of officers was felt on the ground and was clear to see. The soundtrack of sirens swirled around this town once again as police lurched from incident to incident as pockets of violence flared up. Officers are on their way from Scotland, England and Wales to help bolster resources. And they won't be short of work. A leisure centre 25 minutes away in Larne came under attack on Wednesday evening after it emerged some of the foreign families fleeing the Ballymena chaos were being temporarily held there. A short drive around Ballymena's one way road system takes you on a journey through housing estates where people have flooded the streets with union jack flags and stuck yellow A4 sheets to their windows with the words, "LOCALS LIVE HERE". These colourful displays are being seen as a public noticeboard of the nationality of the occupants inside each home. A deterrent to make the angry mob to look elsewhere. And those failing to advertise whether they are a 'native' or not seem to be paying a price. I witnessed an upper floor flat with a window smashed, the guttering on fire and the ground outside ablaze. An older neighbour fled her home downstairs in her dressing gown. Earlier in the day two Romanian women were frantically examining their phones down an alleyway as their kids played on the trampoline in the garden. They were terrified and were bundling their belongings in the car and leaving for good. A sizeable chunk of people born in Ballymena are angry. They do not like the talk from police and politicians that taking to the streets following an alleged sex attack on a teenage girl equates to them being "racist thugs". They see this as an act of venting their feelings. And they are hellbent on continuing this campaign of carnage across Northern Ireland to ensure they prove their point.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
NHS, houses, nuclear submarines: Labour sets out its spending plans
The last few weeks have proved difficult for Rachel Reeves. In public, the news has been dominated by Labour's U-turn on the winter fuel allowance. In private, the Treasury has been caught up in wrangle after wrangle with ministers, all negotiating what their departments would receive in the spending review. Reeves' speech to parliament on Wednesday announcing the review was a chance to tell a more positive story – particularly for a government accused of lacking direction and ambition. As economics editor Heather Stewart reports, there were some big winners: health, defence, and housing. Yet at the same time, day-to-day spending for some departments – such as local government or the environment – seems very tight. So, asks Helen Pidd, will Labour allow those services to come under even more pressure, or will Reeves have to eventually raise taxes to fund them too?
Sky News
2 hours ago
- Sky News
Controversial aid distributer claims Hamas has carried out deadly attack on bus carrying Palestinians
The controversial US and Israeli-backed aid distributor in Gaza has accused Hamas of a deadly attack on a bus carrying Palestinians working with the organisation. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) has said at least five aid workers were killed and it fears some team members "may have been taken hostage". The aid organisation also said multiple people were injured in the alleged attack. In a statement, the GHF has said the bus was carrying more than two dozen people working with the organisation when it was targeted at 10pm Gaza time (8pm UK time) on Wednesday. The GHF said those in the bus were "local Palestinians" working with the organisation to "deliver critical aid". "At the time of the attack, our team was en route to one of our distribution centres in the area west of Khan Younis", the GHF added. It continued in its statement: "We are still gathering facts, but what we know is devastating: there are at least five fatalities, multiple injuries, and fear that some of our team members may have been taken hostage. "We condemn this heinous and deliberate attack in the strongest possible terms. These were aid workers." The GHF also said in its statement that Hamas has in recent days been threatening members of the organisation, including aid workers, and civilians who have been receiving the aid. The organisation said it holds Hamas fully responsible for "taking the lives of our dedicated workers who have been distributing humanitarian aid to the Palestinian people at the foundation's sites in central and southern Gaza". "Tonight, the world must see this for what it is: an attack on humanity. We call on the international community to immediately condemn Hamas for this unprovoked attack and continued threat against our people simply trying to feed the Palestinian people," the GHF said. "We will release additional information once it becomes available. Despite this heinous attack, we will continue our mission to provide critical aid to the people of Gaza." 3:59 The alleged attack came hours after health officials in Gaza said at least 25 Palestinians were killed by Israeli gunfire at a GHF site close to the former settlement of Netzarim, near Gaza City. Medical officials at Shifa and al Quds hospitals say the people were killed as they approached the site. Gaza's health ministry said earlier this week that around 160 people have been killed in shootings near aid sites run by the GHF since they began distributing aid on 26 May. However, the GHF has said there has been no violence in or around the distribution centres themselves. 1:45 Why is the aid system controversial? Israel and the US have said the GHF system is aimed at preventing Hamas from siphoning off assistance. Israel has not provided any evidence of systematic diversion, and the UN denies it has occurred. The foundation's distribution of aid has been marred by chaos, and multiple witnesses have said Israeli troops fired on crowds near the delivery sites. UN agencies and major aid groups have refused to work with the new system, saying it violates humanitarian principles because it allows Israel to control who receives aid and forces people to relocate to distribution sites, risking yet more mass displacement in the territory. Jake Wood, a former US marine, resigned as head of the GHF in May before it began distributing aid in Gaza over concerns about is independence. Mr Wood said the foundation cannot adhere to the "humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality, and independence, which I will not abandon".
