Anti-protest bill will turn London into Moscow

The sight of the Metropolitan Police using excessive force against women expressing their grief and anger at Sarah Everard’s death outraged me, but perhaps it was a blessing in disguise. It has put the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill being debated in Parliament this week under the spotlight where it belongs.

The government was trying to pull a fast one and rush the Bill through Parliament, publishing a draft of the legislation only last Tuesday despite it being very wide-ranging and several hundred pages long. Forcing through legislation that hands the police and ministers powers to restrict our right to protest further undermines Boris Johnson’s claim to be “the most liberal prime minister in decades”.

The legislation seems to be a knee-jerk response to the Extinction Rebellion protests, formulated at a time when a year of lockdowns have made the state far too comfortable with its newfound powers over our lives. Civil rights are now mere privileges and now that the government has realised it can turn our rights on and off whenever it pleases it must be faced down and put back in its box.

In the fact sheet for the Bill, Dame Cressida Dick, the Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, is quoted as saying that the Extinction Rebellion protests show the need for a “change to powers and to legislation that would enable the police to deal better with protests” that “are not primarily violent or seriously disorderly,” but “had an avowed intent to bring policing to its knees and the city to a halt.”

We now know that Dick wrote to Home Secretary Priti Patel in December to urge her to use the “much-needed opportunity” of the Extinction Rebellion protests to give police greater powers to curb protests. This has all the markings of a heavy-handed, knee-jerk government response which should not be rushed through without serious scrutiny.

Where do the proposed new restrictions on “one person protests” come from if not Brexiteer politicians’ irritation with the incredibly persistent and abrasive anti-Brexit campaigner Steve Bray? The new conditions contained within the bill would enable the police to shut down a one-person protest: “Noise generated by the person carrying on the protest may result in serious disruption to the activities of an organisation which are carried on in the vicinity of the protest.”

This could potentially mean any private company could claim its business is being disrupted and the police could move on the protester(s). In fact, this could apply to any of the demonstrations around Westminster which are designed to get the attention of nearby politicians.

The Bill is characterised by its vagueness and ambiguity which has led to alarm bells ringing across the political divide. The Labour Party is set to vote against it and even former Remain and Leave organisations joined together to sign an open letter calling for its withdrawal. The right to protest is more important than left/right or Leave/Remain squabbles.

According to the Bill, protests should not “intentionally” or “recklessly” cause “public nuisance” such as actions that “obstruct the public or a section of the public in the exercise or enjoyment of a right that may be exercised or enjoyed by the public at large.” Nor should protestors’ actions cause “serious distress, serious annoyance, [or] serious inconvenience”.

The idea that this Bill is not a threat to peaceful protest is risible. From pro-Brexit and anti-Brexit demonstrators to Black Lives Matter, Extinction Rebellion and the Suffragettes – this draconian legislation could have been used to silence all of them. The very purpose of protest is to make an impact, cause disruption, to be noticed and heard. Perhaps even – dare I say it – annoy.

It’s not meant to be convenient or quiet. It’s a method for influencing government from outside the political system. This is essential for a liberal democracy, yet the government making a fuss about protecting freedom of speech seems determined to turn London into Moscow in its tolerance of dissent.

The Tories are trying to sell the Bill to their base by exploiting culture war issues such as the controversy over statues that arose from the BLM protests and sentencing for violent criminals. It may have worked until the Met provided a perfect demonstration of how they will use and abuse their new powers.

The death of a Sarah Everard has sparked outrage and brought violence against women to the forefront of national debate. The images of police manhandling women expressing their grief and anger has thankfully inspired passionate opposition to legislation that removes more of our rights and makes no mention of women while coming down hard on vandalisers of statues.

If there’s a silver lining to the shameful events of the last week, let it be the death of the travesty that is the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.