This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . The next check for changes will be

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/oct/05/police-to-get-new-powers-to-crack-down-on-repeated-protests-says-home-office

The article has changed 10 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Police to get more anti-protest powers as Palestine Action ban opponents vow ‘escalation’ Civil liberty groups express concern over plan for more anti-protest powers
(about 4 hours later)
Home secretary says police can consider ‘cumulative impact’ of repeated demonstrations to restrict protests Home secretary says police can consider ‘cumulative impact’ of demonstrations as Palestine Action ban opponents vow ‘escalation’
Ministers are to give police greater powers to restrict protests by allowing them to consider the “cumulative impact” of demonstrations, as organisers of mass protests against the banning of Palestine Action pledged a “major escalation” of their campaign. Civil liberty groups have expressed concern over government plans to hand police greater powers to restrict protests as organisers of mass demonstrations against the banning of Palestine Action pledged a “major escalation” of their campaign.
Shabana Mahmood said on Sunday that repeated large-scale demonstrations over Gaza had caused “considerable fear” for the Jewish community. The home secretary promised to amend the Public Order Act 1986 to explicitly allow the police to take account of frequent protests on local areas in order to impose conditions on public processions and assemblies. Shabana Mahmood said on Sunday that repeated large-scale demonstrations over Gaza had caused “considerable fear” for the Jewish community in the wake of a fatal terror attack on a synagogue last week.
Her words prompted a pledge by Defend Our Juries to escalate the demonstrations in support of Palestine Action over 10 days in November. “The home secretary’s extraordinary new affront to our democracy will only fuel the growing backlash to the ban,” a spokesperson said. Under new powers, police will be able to impose tougher conditions on static protests or marches by taking account of the “cumulative impact” of previous similar demonstrations, she said.
Following her statement, the pressure group Defend Our Juries promised to escalate the demonstrations in support of Palestine Action over 10 days in November. “The home secretary’s extraordinary new affront to our democracy will only fuel the growing backlash to the ban,” a spokesperson said.
The measures have been announced after almost 500 people were arrested this weekend in London for expressing support for Palestine Action. Jewish community leaders, police and Keir Starmer had called on Palestine Action protesters to refrain from demonstrating after Thursday’s killing of two people in the terror attack on a Manchester synagogue.The measures have been announced after almost 500 people were arrested this weekend in London for expressing support for Palestine Action. Jewish community leaders, police and Keir Starmer had called on Palestine Action protesters to refrain from demonstrating after Thursday’s killing of two people in the terror attack on a Manchester synagogue.
Mahmood will also look at all anti-protest laws, with the possibility that powers to ban some demonstrations outright could be strengthened.Mahmood will also look at all anti-protest laws, with the possibility that powers to ban some demonstrations outright could be strengthened.
Speaking on Sunday to Sky News, Mahmood said she believed there was “a gap in the law” that required action, and that she aimed to act at speed. Shami Chakrabarti, the Labour peer and former shadow attorney general, warned that the government should pause before passing draconian powers that could end up in the hands of a Nigel Farage-led government.
“Street protest that isn’t a bit of a nuisance isn’t usually effective. But any government seeking to further restrict it should think about new powers in Farragist hands,” she said.
Two Labour MPs also expressed concern at the move. One told the Guardian: “However distasteful the protests in favour of Palestine Action have been, we must not fall into the trap of making rushed laws which can be used in future to stop justifiable protests.”
If a protest such as Saturday’s in support of Palestine Action takes place at the same site on several occasions, and causes repeated disorder, the police will get the power to instruct organisers to hold the event elsewhere, limit numbers and to set time limits, Home Office sources said.
The changes will amend sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act of 1986, under which anyone breaching conditions set by police faces up to six months in jail, an unlimited fine, or both.
Speaking on Sunday to Sky News, Mahmood said she believed there was “a gap in the law” that required action, and she aimed to act at speed.
“What I will be making explicit is that cumulative disruption, that is to say the frequency of particular protests in particular places, is in and of itself, a reason for the police to be able to restrict and place conditions,” she said.“What I will be making explicit is that cumulative disruption, that is to say the frequency of particular protests in particular places, is in and of itself, a reason for the police to be able to restrict and place conditions,” she said.
Speaking later to BBC1 One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Mahmood denied this was about banning protest: “This is not about a ban. This is about restrictions and conditions that would enable the police to maybe put further time restrictions or move those protests to other places. Speaking later to BBC One’s Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg programme, Mahmood denied this was about banning protest: “This is not about a ban. This is about restrictions and conditions that would enable the police to maybe put further time restrictions or move those protests to other places.
“What I’m allowing is for the police to be able to take cumulative disruption into account, and it is important.”“What I’m allowing is for the police to be able to take cumulative disruption into account, and it is important.”
The new application of the law would be applied to static protests as well as marches and rallies, Home Office sources said. Ministers plan to introduce the new powers through primary legislation to sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act.
It remains unclear whether the planned punishment under cumulative impact will match that of other protest powers. Currently, protest organisers face up to six months’ imprisonment, a fine of up to £2,500 or both for participating in a banned protest.
The Liberal Democrats warned that the plans for further protest restrictions would lead to a greater waste of police time while letting off those inciting violence.The Liberal Democrats warned that the plans for further protest restrictions would lead to a greater waste of police time while letting off those inciting violence.
Max Wilkinson, the party’s home affairs spokesperson, said: “The Conservatives made a total mess of protest laws. I fear Labour seem to be following them down the same path, instead of properly reforming these powers to focus on the real criminals and hate preachers.”Max Wilkinson, the party’s home affairs spokesperson, said: “The Conservatives made a total mess of protest laws. I fear Labour seem to be following them down the same path, instead of properly reforming these powers to focus on the real criminals and hate preachers.”
Legal sources have told the Guardian that the plans could be challenged in the courts, because they mirror failed moves by the former Conservative home secretary Suella Braverman to curb protests. The plans could be challenged in the courts because they mirror failed moves by the former Conservative home secretary Suella Braverman to curb protests.
The court of appeal in June upheld the original judgment in what the civil rights organisation Liberty – which brought the legal challenge – hailed as a major legal victory.
Sign up to First EditionSign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersOur morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion
The court of appeal in June upheld the original judgment in what the civil rights organisation Liberty – which brought the legal challenge – hailed as a major legal victory.
The case centred on legislation passed in June 2023 – without a parliamentary vote – that reduced the threshold for when police could crack down on protests, meaning the law covered anything that was deemed as causing “more than minor” disruption. In May 2024, the high court agreed with Liberty that Braverman’s legislation had been unlawful.The case centred on legislation passed in June 2023 – without a parliamentary vote – that reduced the threshold for when police could crack down on protests, meaning the law covered anything that was deemed as causing “more than minor” disruption. In May 2024, the high court agreed with Liberty that Braverman’s legislation had been unlawful.
Home Office sources pointed out that Liberty won the 2023 case because ministers tried to change the definition of “serious public disorder”, lowering it to cover any crime “more than minor” through a statutory instrument. The measure to block so-called cumulative protests disappeared when the entire statutory instrument was struck down. Home Office sources pointed out that Liberty won the 2023 case because ministers tried to change the definition of “serious public disorder”, lowering it to cover any crime “more than minor” through a statutory instrument.
Officials believe the measures this time will be more robust because they are not trying to lower the threshold and are planning to use primary legislation.Officials believe the measures this time will be more robust because they are not trying to lower the threshold and are planning to use primary legislation.
Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “The police already have immense powers to restrict protests – handing them even more would undermine our rights further while failing to keep people safe from violence like the horrific and heartbreaking antisemitic attack in Manchester. Tom Southerden, a director at Amnesty International UK, said the government’s proposal was “ludicrous” and may be a “cynical” attempt to look tough.
“During times of fear people understandably want to see action, but restricting protest further is likely to fuel tensions by taking away legal and safe ways for people to make their voices heard. Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “The police already have immense powers to restrict protests – handing them even more would undermine our rights further while failing to keep people safe from violence like the horrific and heartbreaking antisemitic attack in Manchester.”
“This announcement comes at a time when it is already getting harder and harder to exercise our right to protest without falling foul of ever expanding anti-protest laws. Our ability to use protest to challenge governments and stand up for what we believe in is central to having a healthy, functioning democracy. It must be upheld.” Defend Our Juries said there would be mass civil disobedience defying the ban from 18 to 28 November, in the lead up to and throughout the judicial review.
Defend Our Juries said there would be mass civil disobedience defying the ban over days from 18 to 28 November, in the lead up to and throughout the judicial review. In a letter to chief constables on Sunday, Mahmood warned that “the country faces a period of heightened tensions and division” and thanked police for their response to Thursday’s attack.
A new pledge form is being launched today by Defend Our Juries, which asks its supporters to “book time off now, and sign the form to tell us where you’ll be taking action”, adding that there would be civil disobedience “in key cities and towns” across Britain. “I have confirmed the government will bring forward legislation to increase the powers available to you to tackle the repeated disruptive protests we have seen, and continue to provide the reassurance to communities that they need.
Under the home secretary’s planned changes, if a protest has caused what a Home Office statement called “repeated disorder” at the same site for repeated weeks, police would be able to order the organisers to move it elsewhere, with anyone who failed to obey risking arrest. “And I will review more widely the full suite of public order legislation, to ensure that it keeps pace with the continued changes in the scale, nature and frequency of protests,” she wrote.
Mahmood, the statement added, would also review existing legislation to ensure that powers were sufficient and being consistently applied. These included police powers to ban some protests completely.
The planned new powers follow protest-related measures in the crime and policing bill going through parliament, which would ban the possession of face coverings or fireworks or flares at protests, and criminalise the climbing of certain war memorials.The planned new powers follow protest-related measures in the crime and policing bill going through parliament, which would ban the possession of face coverings or fireworks or flares at protests, and criminalise the climbing of certain war memorials.