logo
Off-duty officers in Pride event told not to wear items linking them to police

Off-duty officers in Pride event told not to wear items linking them to police

Rhyl Journal3 days ago
The decision by Northumbria Police comes after a court ruled that the force acted unlawfully by allowing its officers to take part in a Pride event last year.
High Court judge Mr Justice Linden said his ruling on Wednesday related only to the 2024 event and that it was up to the force to decide how it approaches Saturday's parade.
Northumbria Police has now confirmed uniformed officers will not be permitted to take part and said any of those who are off-duty and do participate must not visibly identify themselves as being officers or members of the force through clothing, flags, or accessories.
In an update on Friday, the force also said any participating off-duty officers must not 'express support for political aims (e.g. changes to law or policy) or opposition to other lawful views'.
On-duty attendance 'is only permitted where it forms part of the official policing response', the force said.
In a statement it said the approach was 'designed to maintain public confidence in our impartiality, while also respecting our employees' individual rights under the European Convention on Human Rights'.
It added: 'This guidance is not about limiting personal expression, but about ensuring that when our people represent Northumbria Police, they do so in a way that is fair, balanced, and impartial to all communities.'
Lindsey Smith, who describes herself as a 'gender critical' lesbian, took legal action against Northumbria Police over its decision to allow officers to participate in the Newcastle Pride in the City event last July, in which she also participated.
Lawyers for Ms Smith told the High Court that the officers' involvement breached impartiality rules, and that the decision to allow them to take part was unlawful, although barristers for the force opposed the challenge, claiming the decision, made by Chief Constable Vanessa Jardine, was within her 'discretion'.
In his judgment, Mr Justice Linden said Ms Smith is opposed to 'gender ideology', which she believes is 'wrong and dangerous' but has been 'embraced' by the organisers of the event, Northern Pride.
While Ms Smith agreed that the event should be policed, she objected to officers 'associating themselves with the views of supporters of gender ideology and transgender activists by actively participating', the judge said.
Last year's event saw uniformed officers march with some carrying flags which included Pride colours alongside police insignia, and others wearing uniforms with the word 'Police' in Pride colours.
There was also a 'static display' staffed by uniformed officers, which displayed a Progressive Pride flag, which includes representation of transgender and non-binary people, people of marginalised ethnicities and those living with Aids, the judge said.
A police van with the colours of the transgender Pride flag painted on its sides was also present, the court was told.
Northumbria Police said it will have a community engagement display at Northern Pride this weekend, adding that it believed a complete withdrawal of police engagement from such events 'would be a retrograde step and damage trust and confidence amongst members of LGBTQ+ community'.
The force added: 'We want to ensure everyone knows that we are absolutely here for them when they need us.'
The LGB Alliance charity called on the rest of the UK's police forces to follow suit on the withdrawal of uniformed officers from such events and to put in place measures around the participation of off-duty officers.
The charity's chief executive Kate Barker said: 'Since our founding, LGB Alliance has been working with police and crime commissioners to raise our supporters' concerns about partisan policing that favours gender activists over LGB people.
'We will continue this work until the UK's remaining 42 forces follow the lead of their colleagues in Northumbria, and stop endorsing a movement they do not understand.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told
Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

Leader Live

time18 minutes ago

  • Leader Live

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights).' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Mr Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, later said: 'The impacts (of proscription) have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Sir James Eadie KC, representing the department on Monday, said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. He said: 'Judicial review is, and has been accepted to be, a remedy of last resort and that is for very good and well-established reasons.' However, Mr Husain told the court on Monday morning that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription… even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude on Monday. A decision may be given at the end of the hearing, or in writing at a later date.

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told
Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

Rhyl Journal

timean hour ago

  • Rhyl Journal

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights).' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Mr Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, later said: 'The impacts (of proscription) have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. However, Mr Husain told the court on Monday that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription… even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude on Monday. A decision may be given at the end of the hearing, or in writing at a later date.

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told
Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

North Wales Chronicle

timean hour ago

  • North Wales Chronicle

Palestine Action terror ban made UK ‘international outlier', High Court told

The group's co-founder Huda Ammori is making a bid to legally challenge Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The case returned to the High Court in London on Monday, where lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to grant the green light for a full legal challenge against the decision to ban the group, saying it was an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. Raza Husain KC said: 'We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR (European Convention on Human Rights).' The barrister continued: 'The decision is so extreme as to render the UK an international outlier.' Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' 'The consequences are not just limited to arrest,' Mr Husain later said, telling the court there was 'rampant uncertainty' in the aftermath of the ban. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also for Ms Ammori, later said: 'The impacts (of proscription) have already been significant.' She continued: 'Dozens and dozens of people have been arrested for protesting, seated and mostly silent protest.' The Home Office is defending the legal challenge. Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. However, Mr Husain told the court on Monday that the POAC was not 'convenient nor effective' in this case. He continued: 'It would be quite absurd to say that we should tolerate the consequences of the proscription… even if it is unlawful, and just go to POAC. 'That is an absurd position.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. More than 100 people were arrested across the country during demonstrations this weekend protesting against the proscription, with protests held in London, Manchester, Edinburgh, Bristol and Truro on Saturday. Saturday's arrests brought the total number of people arrested since the ban came into force to more than 200, with more than 72 arrested across the UK last weekend and 29 the week before. The hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to conclude on Monday. A decision may be given at the end of the hearing, or in writing at a later date.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store