Two tier policing: myth or fact?

Chris Hobbs who has been following significant protests by a range of activist groups since the pandemic, debunks some of the criticisms being aimed at public order policing

A search on the phrase ‘two-tier,’ policing on most social media sites, will bring about a Tsunami of responses from, primarily, those on the far right of the political spectrum but the issue is also a cause-celebre, for those on the hard left.

In the middle of this swirl of allegations are the UK police; primarily the Metropolitan police who have had to deal with diversity issues over decades with, until relatively recently, most criticism emanating from the left. However, the majority of criticism is now pouring down from those on the right including former Home Secretary Suella Braverman.

Allegations of ‘two tier’ policing have been accentuated by the crisis in the Middle East which followed the dreadful massacre of October the 7th.

Policing these huge pro-Palestinian protests plus numerous local events, has proved a major challenge for the Met and its officers who doubtless could still recall the nightmarish challenges resulting from the complex myriad of ever changing Covid regulations and laws. Violence against police was seen at several anti-Lockdown protests and, more disturbingly, violence against fellow protesters who attempted to form a protective line in front of police officers.

The situation in Gaza meant that, from last October, officers were now in the business, of not only policing fast-moving and potentially violent protests but of interpreting a variety of chants, posters and placards in order to judge whether they crossed the line into an actionable ‘hate crime’ or terrorist offence.

Two females were arrested shortly after the first major Saturday protest for sporting images of paragliders on the back of their jackets. Those with Hamas flags or carrying placards openly supporting and naming Hamas have been sought and frequently arrested.

Personally, over the numerous protests I’ve witnessed I’ve heard chanting for ‘Jihad’ or ‘Intifada’ on just half a dozen occasions but despite the allegations of two-tier policing, police have made arrests.

Pre-Christmas fireworks and walkabouts

In the immediate aftermath of October 7th and doubtless due to the proximity of Halloween and Guy Fawkes, there was the occasional firework propelled in the direction of officers; in one incident, whilst police were dealing with an arrest in Whitehall, another protester came and struck a PC over the head with a megaphone. The assailant was swiftly detained.

A feature of these protests before Christmas was a tendency, at their conclusion, for groups of youths to congregate and embark on a ‘walkabout.’ Such groups, numbering between one and three hundred were invariably escorted by officers and there were skirmishes resulting in arrests. Each arrest was normally accompanied by chants of; ‘Let him (or her) go,’ or ‘shame on you;’ an oft repeated chant by those on the hard left and far right.

Earlier occupations during demonstrations, albeit briefly, of Zara and H&M stores by protesters due to their company links with Israel appear to have been abandoned as counter-productive. However, the marches continue and have been portrayed as hate marches which have paralysed and terrified both Londoners and tourists. Even the recent Lond Wanley report, so accurate in many ways, appears to have been compiled without him actually attending the protests be they local or national.

Violent hate marches; fact of media hype?

On a violent disorder scale (albeit mine) of 1 to 10 these major ‘national’ protests would, since Christmas, barely register a 2. Before Christmas, they would have struggled to reach a 4. This isn’t simply my view, but echoes the views of those officers who police these protests on a regular basis.

More recently, these marches and rallies have been the subject of counter-protests by those who support Israel.  Despite the chanting and ‘counter’ chanting together with vitriolic exchanges of insults, there has only been one determined attempt to breach the police cordon and the pro-Palestinian protestor was arrested.

Bystanders and tourists, far from being terrified by these marches, invariably emerge from coffee bars, restaurants and pubs in order to capture events on their smartphones. At the most recent national protest, the Met admitted that it made an error in that the static pro-Israel counter-protest was placed too close to the prescribed route taken by pro-Palestinian marchers. Considering both sides were ‘cheek by jowl,’ and, aside from the fact that insults were exchanged, there was virtually no attempt at physical violence.

The marches have also been attended by several hundred individuals who form the ‘Jewish block;’ These are British Jews who are opposed to Israeli actions in Gaza. Also observed on these protests are Jews of orthodox appearance who belong to the Neturei Karta sect and who support the Palestinian cause.

“We’ll walk where we want?”

These protests have also seen pro-Israeli individuals attempt to place themselves amongst the pro-Palestinian protesters hoping to provoke a reaction. Other than a couple of badly swung punches by middle-aged protesters, they have attracted mostly insults. Removal from the situation by police always attracts significant publicity and are given as examples of ‘two-tier’ policing. In fact, the safety of those individuals and the avoidance of disorder is the priority of officers but that doesn’t suit the various agendas.

The notion of ‘our freedom to walk,’ at these protests flies against the Met’s policy of keeping rival groups apart, which also includes football fans. Those who criticise the Met for curbing these freedoms, seem unaware that the reverse also applies. The Met have intervened, sometimes at the behest of Jewish protesters, when pro-Palestinian counter-protesters have attempted to infiltrate pro-Israeli events. At the conclusion of the first pro-Israeli rally in Trafalgar Square several youths were arrested when they attempted to unfurl a Palestinian flag in front of outraged crowds; hardly an example of ‘two-tier,’ policing.

Intimidation and law-breaking

Some actions linked to the Gaza issue are, simply, criminal offences. This includes abuse, assaults and criminal damage which, in turn, are designed to intimidate individuals and companies who have links to Israel. Of particular interest to activists are companies which supply arms and weapons linked technology to Israel; Elbit systems and BAE are but two.

More recently, the emergence of splinter groups such as Youth Demand and Palestinian Action have seen ‘direct action,’ which has involved criminal damage to property and the blockage of roads. Whilst there was no actual damage of the Cenotaph just days ago, using it to display the Palestinian flag and painting slogans on the adjacent roadway attracted considerable criticism.

These groups were prominent at a recent ‘emergency’ mid-week protest outside Downing Street where there were scuffles with police to the extent that batons were drawn and a force-mobilisation implemented which meant rushing officers into Westminster from across London.

Also of concern to Lord Hanley is the intimidation of individuals such as MPs and local councillors by pro-Palestinian activists. Arrests of activists, however, are no guarantee of a satisfactory final result at the end of the judicial process which, with trials of Just Stop Oil activists appear to have acquired all the characteristics of a lottery. Some have walked free while those who blocked the M25, including leader Roger Hallam, received substantial prison sentences.

Another aspect of the Gaza conflict is the massive drain on both police resources and finances. Officers are taken away from their normal duties and, whilst some overtime will be welcomed by some officers, the overall effect of these frequent protests is to deprive the majority of Londoners of effective police coverage.

Too robust or not robust enough?

As with other protest groups, there are frequent complaints from those in the media and on the far right that police are not ‘robust’ enough in dealing with protest. ‘Robust’ policing that leads to confrontation and possibly panic resulting in scenes involving crying or injured children would lead to condemnation across the political divide.

Allegations in relation to the ‘soft’ policing of the national Palestine Solidarity Campaign marches comes from elements of the far right including former Home Secretary Suella Braverman, but, interestingly, complaints are also being made from the pro-Palestinian side of harsh, oppressive policing. 14 leftist groups including Black Lives Matter, the Jewish Network for Palestine and the Peacemaker Trust.

Arresting challenges

Initial protests by Extinction Rebellion presented a real problem to police in terms of the volume of arrests that needed to be made and the lack of custody space available. The problems however were solved.

With the Insulate Britain campaign, the major policing issue was getting officers to the section of roadway or motorway being blocked; officers and those arrested then had to be transported to custody suites where space was available. Ensuring the welfare of protesters, especially the elderly or disabled is a pre-requisite of policing protest but again this proved to be a controversial issue.

Insulate Britain gave way to Just Stop Oil and the blockading of roads in London and elsewhere. New legislation enabled the Met and other forces to make numerous arrests but the term ‘two-tier,’ policing again was heard as officers had to deal with those taking the law into their own hands.

The Met’s two-tier ‘soft on the left,’ policing resulted in almost three and a half thousand arrests of Extinction Rebellion activists between April 2019 and September 2022. Since October the 7th around 500 arrests linked to pro-Palestine protests have been made and these won’t include arrests as a result of City police, BTP and MOD police operations. Just Stop Oil arrests between November 1st and the 7th of December last year totalled 650.

Despite overwhelming evidence, some activists have been acquitted with the Human Rights Act paving a pivotal role in the trials while others, as stated above, have been imprisoned. Whilst those on the right may still criticise police for ‘soft’ political policing that favours the left, those currently in prison or facing prison sentences may disagree.

Black Lives Matter

Whilst most UK BLM protests were peaceful some in London, predictably were not. There is, however, no suggestion that officers were ‘soft,’ on violent protesters. There was, however, criticism that officers were generally left to face violent crowds in their ‘day,’ uniforms. One serial was filmed being overwhelmed and fleeing but in the filmed confrontations in Whitehall, police stood their ground and used proportionate force against violent mobs. Interestingly, those officers policing these protests were shocked and disgusted by the abuse heaped upon their black colleagues.

A constant allegation emanating from the far-right is that police, especially the Met, fall over themselves to appease minority groups. Frequent reference is made to officers who ‘took the knee,’ in the immediate aftermath of George Floyd’s death in the US and these references are normally accompanied by footage taken at the time. In fact, I remember, whilst obeying Covid regulations, noting each time ‘taking the knee,’ occurred and I would suggest that between 30 and 40 officers out of 120,000 plus made the gesture which came to a halt after the first acts of violence.  Nevertheless, it is a powerful propaganda tool when promulgating the argument of ‘two-tier,’ policing.

Social media, distortion and selective editing

Footage, normally that captured on mobile phones, can, with the assistance of careful editing, be used to promote or reinforce a point of view. Thus, the sight of a police officer striking an individual can be used to illustrate an example of ‘police brutality’ simply by editing out that which caused the officer to react or respond in the way that he or she did.

Equally alleged police inaction can be used to illustrate police ‘wokeness’ or bias. A typical example occurred during the Islamic Eid celebrations on the streets of Southall. Footage appeared across social media of a line of officers backed up against shops, being pelted with missiles. This was interpreted as police being too woke to vigorously respond to the crowd because that crowd were Muslim. This, it was pointed out, was in stark contrast to their ‘brutal treatment’ meted out by police to those celebrating St. George’s Day at a rally in Whitehall.

In actual fact, the Islamic Eid festival was policed primarily by local community officers due to the fact that no disorder was anticipated. However, towards the end of the evening a crowd of some 300 gathered before confronting the wholly outnumbered officers who nevertheless stood their ground until properly equipped police officers arrived and dispersed the crowd.

Another example of ‘footage distortion,’ occurred during the above mentioned midweek pro-Palestine emergency protest where there was some disorder. Officers were pictured running and a far right ‘X’ account claimed they were running away. In fact, they were running to get ahead of a crowd that had broken away and were heading to Parliament Square.

Footage of individuals being allegedly arrested for simply displaying a Cross of St. George or Union Jack flag appears frequently on social media and are recycled at intervals to give the impression that the incident had occurred recently. Comments by the various forces that the individual was in fact arrested for a specific offence, normally involving racist abuse, is ignored but again each time such footage appears, comments in response will again invariably refer to ‘two-tier,’ policing.

Football lads and batons

An ‘X’ search using the parameters; ‘batons’ and ‘football lads’ attracts countless references to the alleged fact that whilst police fail to take any action that could be construed as robust against Palestinian and other leftist or minority group protests, they will frequently draw batons and lay into ‘football lads.’

In fact, batons being drawn at football matches is a rare occurrence and tends to occur at ‘high risk’ matches where two sets of supporters are looking to confront each other.

The notion that ‘football lads,’ consist of banter loving individuals who merely want to have a friendly pint with opposing fans but are prevented from doing so by baton wielding police, is clearly arrant nonsense.

Where batons are drawn its normally to prevent rival hooligans from clashing or one set of hooligans from attacking rival fans. Towards the end of last season footage appeared on social media of Spurs ‘fans’ attempting to attack Arsenal supporters in the ground at the end of the game. There is also footage outside the ground as police, with batons drawn dealt with a mob of missile throwing ‘fans’ attempting to ‘get at’ their rivals in what was clearly serious disorder.

Football Lads and protest

The activities of the EDL and its links with sections of football fans are well documented elsewhere as are those of two ‘football lads’ organisations. In June, 2020, after the death of George Floyd, ‘football lads’ were summoned to Parliament Square ‘protect the statues.’ Whilst Black Lives Matter counter-protests were called off, a number of activists materialised in Trafalgar Square and fighting broke out with some ‘football lads.’

Those already in Parliament Square became aware of what was going on but found themselves ‘kettled’ which resulted in fighting with police as they tried to join the disorder in Trafalgar Square.

Later those involved in the protest who made their way home via Waterloo found themselves being ‘picked off,’ by gangs who were waiting for them.

It was, however, the events resulting from the Israeli response to the 7th of October that brought the issue of ‘football lads’ back into focus.

On Saturday, November the 11th, football lads were summoned to ‘defend the Cenotaph from pro-Palestinian supporters who were marching the same day. Despite assurances from the organisers that they would be going nowhere near the Cenotaph, more than 100 arrests were made over the course of the day as separate groups of ‘football lads’ clashed with police in Soho, near Vauxhall Bridge and in Parliament Square.

A planned pro-Israeli protest was also planned in November; an indication that football lads might attend to show their support brought an angry reaction from the organisers.

Tommy Robinson, however ignored the request and, in a blaze of publicity was pepper-sprayed during his arrest. A bungled prosecution saw a not guilty verdict which was delivered, his supporters would say appropriately, on the 23rd of April; St. George’s Day.

On the same day, a St. Georges Day celebration was held in Whitehall. Before the event began, a group attempted to form up and march along Whitehall towards Trafalgar Square in defiance of imposed conditions. They were met by a cordon of police and tried to push their way through. Two mounted officers who were close-by came to assist and the incident was duly recorded on mobile phones.

The incident was portrayed in sections of social media as evidence of police brutality and two-tier policing in that Palestinian supporters were not treated in the same way. TSG officers who were involved in the cordon reacted with amused astonishment at the allegation. They felt the incident was simply a ‘bit of push and shove,’ and couldn’t be construed as serious. Batons weren’t drawn, no-one was injured and no-one was arrested.

The Harehills riot

The latest incident which was greeted with positive exultation by police critics on the far right concerned the riot at Harehills. This was, according to numerous critics on social media, clear evidence that the incident illustrated not only the wokeness of police but the fact that they were cowards.

Initially the blame for the disorder was directed against the Muslim community, before news began to circulated that the initial disorder was linked to a Roma family who resisted attempts by social services to take their children into care. Whilst this aroused the wrath of that community, it appears other sections were only too willing to join in to the extent that vast, hostile crowds materialised quicky.

Herein lay the first problem for police; the disorder appears to have been so quick and so spontaneous that its attempted resolution fell to local response officers. Their priority was, as the situation became positively dangerous, to extricate the social workers and themselves which they did. Other response officers would have reacted to the calls for assistance and it appears were faced with a situation that was beyond their control.

These appear to be the officers who, to the delight of critics, retreated facing the mob and then turned and ran for it; they can then be seen jumping into their police vehicles. I’m guessing that they had been ordered to leave the scene; the fact is that they neither had the equipment nor the numbers to take on a large mob.

Footage from Harehills later in the evening showed PSU’s with properly equipped officers attempt to regain control but again they faced a large hostile mob determined to inflict injury to those officers. The simple fact is that if relatively few officers are facing a crowd of hundreds or even thousands, there is little option but to withdraw or risk being overwhelmed.

The factual but ‘lacklustre’ official media response of West Yorkshire police does little to answer critics and is sadly typical of the ‘Comms’ sections of most police forces. However, it may not have escaped the notice of the less blinkered that three days after the riot, West Yorkshire officers, collectively smeared as cowards, were dealing with a horrendous road traffic collision that killed six including a family of four.

Research has shown that front-line police officers will experience between 400 and 600 traumatic incidents during a 30-year career which is 100 times more than the average person

I chatted to a Detective Inspector who lives locally to me recently. He heads a unit which deals with online child abuse and sexual exploitation.

I asked him how he coped. He replied that it was easier for him as he was the supervisor but he felt for his officers who were viewing the unspeakable for hours at a time. The welfare of his officers was of paramount importance.

Poor police ‘comms’

Constant denigration from social and mainstream media be it from the right or left only serves to undermine those officers who very often feel betrayed by their own senior officers and woeful communications departments both of which frequently fail to defend their own corners.

Only rarely do force communications departments bite back against falsehoods or exaggerations, one example being the police sergeant who prevented the prominent Jewish activist from ‘walking where he wished.’

In addition to CCTV and smartphone filming of events, a valuable tool in the police armoury is the body worn camera footage of officers. Recently, and exceptionally, heroic scenes of Met officers at a fire captured on BWV footage were pushed into the public domain in record time. Of course, legal considerations such a prejudicing a potential trial may inhibit such actions but even then, such relevant footage could and should be released post-trial as a matter of course; happily, there are signs that this is an increasingly frequent occurrence.

A more concerted all-round approach to ‘Comms’ by the relevant department in each police force would do much to ameliorate spurious allegations of ‘two-tier’ policing that emanate from across the political spectrum.

Chris Hobbs is a former Special Branch officer who follows protests as an observer for Police Oracle.

Category: OpsPublic Order