I watched the police arrest hundreds of peaceful protesters – I fear Britain is on a slippery slope towards authoritarianism
The demonstration was organised by Defend Our Juries, which had called on participants to sit peacefully on the Parliament Square lawn between 1pm and 2pm, holding signs that read: 'I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.' Organisers had expected around 500 people. In fact, thousands turned up.
That morning, I had published an opinion piece in The Independent announcing that I would be there, holding a sign quoting Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): 'Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.'
I also quoted Volker Türk, the UN high commissioner for human rights, who warned that the UK government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation 'appears to constitute an impermissible restriction on those rights that is at odds with the UK's obligation under international human rights law'.
When I arrived at 1pm, the square was surrounded by police. Hundreds of Metropolitan Police vans were stationed around the square, stretching as far as Oxford Street. Officers formed cordons to prevent people entering, but I managed to squeeze in. For nearly three hours, I stood in silence, holding my sign.
The arrests began shortly after the scheduled sit-in concluded at 2pm. Officers began to position themselves to advance against the peaceful protesters seated on the lawn, and the few lying on the ground. Police reinforcements, including officers from Wales, swept into the square. Of the 532 arrests, 522 were for the simple act of holding placards supporting Palestine Action, under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act, which carries a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.
The statistics are as shocking as the scenes I saw. According to the police's own figures, 112 of those detained were in their 70s, and 15 in their 80s. Nearly half were 60 or older, with an average age of 54.
The police waged a relentless campaign against the protesters. Many were frail, elderly, or disabled. I saw priests and vicars in clerical collars led away in handcuffs. I saw retired nurses and NHS healthcare workers in scrubs being taken into police vans.
One of them, Nick, was interviewed, and asked if he was afraid. His reply was very moving and and it almost brought me to tears: 'I'm absolutely terrified. I'm shaking. I'll be honest with you. I nearly cried earlier. The thought of doing something like this is just awful, but it's even more awful if we don't do it. I mean, I think to myself, you know, I've seen things, not on the mass media. I've seen things that cannot ever be unseen. And if we don't protest about it, we're culpable.'
I also saw Jewish protesters critical of the Israeli government's actions being arrested alongside climate and human rights activists, including Chris Romberg, 75, a former British Army colonel and the son of a Holocaust survivor. No one was spared.
One image that is seared in my mind: an elderly blind man in a wheelchair being dragged away by multiple officers as demonstrators shouted 'Let him go!' and 'Shame on you, shame on you!'
I also watched the police arrest a frail woman in her 80s suffering from Parkinson's disease, while her son pleaded with the officers not to arrest her. The Metropolitan Police's motto is 'Working Together for a Safer London', but it is hard to see how dedicating so many resources to policing a peaceful protest and arresting frail and elderly citizens exercising such an ancient British freedom achieves this objective.
Jonathan Porritt, former environmental adviser to King Charles, referred to the UK government's policy as 'absolutely standard authoritarian tactics'.
'I've come to the conclusion that the UK government is incontrovertibly complicit in this genocide not just through the continuing sale of arms to Israel, but because of its reckless refusal to follow guidance to seek to prevent genocide in countries like Gaza.'
This is exactly how states erode democratic freedoms – not in one sudden lurch, but in small, calculated steps, until dissent itself becomes a criminal offence.
The decision to ban Palestine Action was itself the product of a cynical political ploy. Home secretary Yvette Cooper bundled the group together with two violent white supremacist organisations – the neo-Nazi Maniacs Murder Cult and the Russian Imperial Movement – and forced MPs to vote for all or none. Many later admitted they felt they had no choice but to approve the ban.
As Yasmine Ahmed, UK Director of Human Rights Watch, has warned: 'Proscribing Palestine Action is a grave abuse of state power and a terrifying escalation in this government's crusade to curtail protest rights.'
The crucial issue here is that Palestine Action exposed what it – and many of us – see as the UK's complicity in the commission of genocide by Israel against the Palestinian people. Since December 2023, the RAF has flown more than 600 surveillance missions over Gaza, reputedly to locate hostages. This is why ordinary citizens – older people, clergy, disabled protesters – were criminalised for condemning what we believe to be genocide and demanding accountability.
It also begs the question: who does prime minister Keir Starmer answer to – the UK electorate, Donald Trump, or the Israeli government and its lobbying organisations?
Let me be clear: I unequivocally condemn Hamas for the atrocities of 7 October 2023. I call for an immediate and lasting ceasefire, and the unconditional release of all hostages. I was horrified seeing the images of an emaciated hostage. These crimes demand justice, but not through the carpet bombing of Gaza from North to South, the slaughter of civilians, and what is surely a deliberate policy of starvation of the population.
Renowned human rights lawyer Clive Stafford Smith, who has defended Guantánamo Bay detainees, has drawn direct parallels between this crackdown and authoritarian measures elsewhere: 'Supporting Palestine Action's right to protest is not the same as supporting Palestine Action. It's time for Keir Starmer to remember why human rights exist.'
Even conservative voices such as Andrew Neil, who strongly disagrees with Palestine Action's aims, have condemned the terrorism designation as absurd and a waste of police time and public resources.
What I saw on Saturday was not public order policing. It was the suppression of lawful dissent, and the deliberate targeting of vulnerable people to send a chilling message: no cause is safe from criminalisation. This is the logic of authoritarianism – a steady erosion of freedoms under the pretext of security.
I know what authoritarianism looks like. I was born in Nicaragua. In 1981, in Honduras, I faced Salvadorian death squads armed with M16 assault rifles. I had a terrifying experience that changed the course of my life. That experience taught me the importance of bearing witness. I came to Parliament Square to stand with ordinary citizens calling attention to the genocide against the Palestinian people – and the UK government's complicity.
The UK government has embarked upon a dangerous path. The right to peaceful protest, the cornerstone of our democracy – from the suffragettes to the anti-apartheid movement – is under attack. The government has conflated dissent with terrorism, and the police have acted as enforcers of political orthodoxy rather than guardians of public safety.
When Benjamin Disraeli said in 1845 that 'a Conservative government is an organised hypocrisy', who could have imagined that his words would describe so aptly the current Labour government and its authoritarian home secretary?
The question we must ask ourselves is simple: When history judges us, will we be remembered as those who stood against injustice, or those who stood by in silence?
Parliament Square on 9 August was not just a police operation. It was a test of our democracy – and it is a test we are in danger of failing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
‘The Left blacklisted me for criticising smug London Review of Books'
The founder of a literary magazine claims he has been blacklisted by the Left for criticising the London Review of Books (LRB) as 'smug'. Booklaunch, the UK's most widely distributed literary magazine, had previously given out tens of thousands of free copies of its publication with The Spectator and The New Statesman. But now Dr Stephen Games, its founder and editor, claims his independent literary magazine has been 'no-platformed' and 'cancelled' by The New Statesman under pressure from the LRB. Dr Games alleged the LRB 'poured poison in the ear of The New Statesman', causing it to sever its ties with Booklaunch. 'It's dirty and shabby and inexplicable that magazines that ought to be committed to free expression and plurality of expression should feel that Booklaunch is so threatening to them that they have to shut it out of existence,' he claimed. The New Statesman and the LRB have declined to comment on the row, and it remains unclear exactly why the relationship has soured. However, Dr Games believes it can be traced back to last summer's Issue 20 of Booklaunch, which carried an editorial that read: 'We used to worship at the LRB's altar. Not any longer.' The editorial went on: 'Something has happened at the LRB that makes one warier of its contributors and less confident about their judgments. The magazine's once unrivalled openness has been replaced by small-mindedness in which the rigour of proper argumentation is now accompanied by labelling, dog whistles and taunts. 'Fun for those who like that sort of thing; dishonourable if you hold the LRB to a higher account. So limited has the LRB become in what it will examine openly that it seems to be suffering from locked-in syndrome.' LRB coverage of Middle East criticised The editorial goes on to criticise the LRB for its coverage of the Middle East as 'uniformly one-sided', and compares it to Nazi 'propaganda', adding: 'Such a lack of balanced analysis does a disservice to the complex and deeply contested nature of the conflict... 'Der Stürmer [the Nazi propaganda tabloid] was similarly effective in its day: we often underrate propaganda as always crude and obvious; on the contrary, it can be intelligent, sophisticated, difficult for the ordinary reader to find fault with and attractive to read. Those who commission these essays are complicit... 'As it stands, its writing on the Middle East is reminiscent of the Inquisition – admit you're a heretic so we can burn you or deny it until we've tortured you to death.' The piece also accuses the LRB for endorsing 'the culture of the smug', with its 'side operation selling commercial fripperies, from branded tote bags to high-priced picnic blankets and umbrellas', and for having an array of writers hailing from 'upper class stock', citing Mary Wellesley, the daughter of the Marquess of Douro and Princess Antonia of Prussia, as an example. It also alleges the editorial team are 'ensconced in their Bloomsburian towers, away from the practical realities they critique and the divisions they promote'. Dr Games said the LRB also used to distribute Booklaunch, but claimed it terminated that arrangement following a misapprehension about Booklaunch allegedly telling an advertiser that it was part of the same stable as the LRB. Despite this, Booklaunch continued to have a positive relationship with its other distributors, The New Statesman and The Spectator, for around six years. 'Suddenly, and completely out of the blue, these two important media vehicles of the political Left [The New Statesman and the LRB] are acting in concert to squeeze us out,' Dr Games claimed. 'They must have a motive, but I can only guess what it might be. It looks to me like spiteful political cancelling.' 'Fine upstanding organs of the Left' Dr Games claimed it was 'very odd' that 'two major players should collude – which is what it looks like – to shut another player out of the market', describing Booklaunch as a 'minnow' by comparison. He said: 'It feels like the sort of thing that a cartel would do to prevent competition. 'It's an action which goes against what you would expect to be each magazine's commitment to free speech and free expression... they're both fine upstanding organs of the Left, and fine upstanding organs of the Left have recently been getting into the habit of, you know, cancelling people they don't like and no-platforming them. 'And this would seem to be an example of that.' The Telegraph has seen confirmation from The New Statesman that it planned to circulate Booklaunch in May, but that this never happened. The New World has since replaced The New Statesman as a distributor of Booklaunch.
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
PETER HITCHENS: We're cheating our children into toiling away for years to get a degree nobody needs
Those happy schoolgirls who leap into the air each August rejoicing over their A-levels really ought to be sunk in gloom, marching angrily with their parents to Westminster and Whitehall to demand an apology. For they have been horribly cheated, and they are now about to be trapped in impossible debt in return for 'degrees' which will 'qualify' them to work in such exalted places as bowling alleys, pest control companies, shoe shops and estate agents.
The Guardian
29 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Farage adviser said UK would be better off if it had not fought Nazi Germany
An adviser used by Nigel Farage and others in Reform UK to boost their social media popularity has suggested that Britain would be better off had it stayed neutral in the second world war instead of fighting Nazi Germany. Jack Anderton, who ran Farage's hugely successful TikTok account before helping Luke Campbell become the Reform mayor of Hull and East Yorkshire, also said the UK should not support Ukraine in its fight against Russian aggression. In a post on his personal blog about Britain's international standing, Anderton said that in a future world of 'meritocracy', the UK could 'regain' former colonies such as Australia, Canada and South Africa. He added that the UK should copy the policy of mass incarceration carried out by El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, widely condemned as an abuse of human rights. Anderton has never been employed by Reform but the 23-year-old established Farage on TikTok, where he now has 1.3m followers, before working closely on Campbell's election campaign. He remains a central part of Campbell's circle, and the mayor is known to have made efforts to get him on to his roster of staff, which have been thwarted because he cannot have political appointees. Anderton's personal blog, titled Britain Needs Change, includes an entry from last year about what he called 'a self-interested British foreign policy', arguing that the only conflict in the last century that was in the UK's interest was the Falklands war. 'Trillions of pounds of British taxes have been spent in foreign lands in the pursuit of 'democracy', 'human rights' and 'doing what is right',' the post said. 'More than a million British lives have been lost since WW1 in wars and battles that have never once been fought by British men, on this island.' Fighting in both the world wars ensured the UK was no longer a great power, he wrote: 'We impoverished ourselves for decades, we didn't finish paying the loans off to America until 2006. Our economy stagnated, we lost an empire, and we are pushed around by America. And Germany, a country we beat, has been richer than us since the 1970s. 'Alternative history is interesting; if Britain had not fought in WW1 and WW2, it would not have had to rely on America for economic support, and it would have had the independence to act accordingly. Britain could have developed India, Cyprus, Fiji, Malta, Saint Lucia, Seychelles, the Bahamas, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Ireland and New Zealand. In the coming meritocracy, perhaps Britain could regain some of these nations.' The same post also argues against providing support for Ukraine after Russia's invasion: 'We are sending billions of pounds (that we cannot afford) to prop up a country that we have no allegiance to. Russia is not our enemy, they have not attacked Britain.' Anderton calls for a shake-up of the Foreign Office so that all decisions are made purely on the basis of whether or not they benefit Britain: 'Instead, what we have are people who should be working for the UN or a charity rather than working in the British Foreign Office.' In another post from 2024, on crime, Anderton enthusiastically endorses the policies of Nayib Bukele, who has dramatically cut gang violence and wider crime through mass detentions that have put 2% of El Salvador's population in prison. 'Extraordinary times require extraordinary measures,' he wrote. 'I'd even argue the measures aren't that extraordinary and should be in place in times of normalcy. 'El Salvador is perhaps a lesson for those in Britain who wish to take back control of their country. Power works, and it is all that matters. State power when used effectively is basically omnipotent. The meritocracy will be established, criminals and corrupt officials will be jailed, immigration will drop to zero, houses will be built, and our citizens will once again feel proud of the country they call home.' Anderton was contacted for comment. Campbell's office referred the matter to Reform UK, who said Anderton was not employed by either the party or the mayor.
