Viewpoint: Is there now a case for curbing the frequency of protests?

Given the frequency of all kinds of protests in central London and the abstraction rate of officers from 'normal' duties, Chris Hobbs asks if the law needs to be changed with new restrictions.

The seriousness of the issues surrounding events in the Middle-East is painfully obvious to all regardless of which side of the divide individuals may have positioned themselves. The right to protest is rightly enshrined in both British tradition and law and most of the populace would probably agree that there has to be certain restrictions placed on such protests in order that citizens can continue with their daily activities.

The most frequently held protests since October 7th have been in relation to those linked to events concerning the massacre undertaken by Hamas and the response of Israel. This has now escalated to include Iran.

Large national protests organised by the Palestine Solidarity Campaign take place at intervals of around one month and, whilst numbers in the immediate aftermath of October the 7th reached six figures, they are now around a steady figure of between 10 and 15,000. These protests are normally opposed by pro-Israeli static counter-protests numbering around 300. These relatively low numbers may well be influenced by the fact that most PSC protests take place on Saturday; the Jewish sabbath.

In terms of serious disorder, these protests have barely reached a 2 on a disorder scale (mine) of 1 to 10. In the early months post October 7th, youthful groups, at the conclusion on the main protest, went on ‘walkabouts’ which resulted on fireworks being thrown and arrests made. The imposition of conditions have meant that these actions can be ‘nipped in the bud,’ if deemed desirable.

In addition to these main marches, there have also been ‘local actions’ which might involve a form of picketing such as of Barclays Banks and other institutions linked to Israel.

More seriously, there have also been overtly criminal actions such as breaking into premises of companies linked to Israel as well as acts of criminal damage normally involving red paint.

Unpopular with officers

Serious violence may have been rare, yet these protests are deeply unpopular with many officers who would prefer to be policing their own boroughs and coping with the explosion of violent crime, theft and anti-social behaviour. Another reason for their unpopularity is the, ‘please Miss’ syndrome where individuals from both sides rush up to officers and complain about placards or chants being shown/shouted by the other side. Failure to act can lead to shoulder numbers being noted and complaints made.

Comments that these marches place central London in a state of terror are somewhat exaggerated. The reaction of the public is normally to emerge from shops, restaurants and pubs in order to take photos.

Morale sapping

In addition to being taken away from their normal place of duty, the morale sapping denigration of officers by all sides be they pro-Palestinian, pro-Israel, hard left or far right is also a factor. Both sides have referred to ‘two tier’ policing while disparaging AI constructed cartoons have emerged from the far right showing police bowing to Muslims.

Officers have, in fact, made something like 600 arrests during this period, including 100 when pro-Palestinian protesters ignored conditions and attempted to march on BBC Broadcasting House. They have also had to deal with pro-Israeli ‘inserts’ who emerge in the midst of Palestine protests attempting to provoke the participants. They claim that they’re simply exercising their ‘freedom of expression.’ Another unpleasant feature of these protests is the targeting of certain officers which can include racist abuse.

Recent events

This month we’ve had a midweek lobby of Parliament which involved protesters dressed in red forming a cordon which ‘surrounded’ Parliament and in fact stretched from Westminster Bridge, around the Parliamentary estate and down to Lambeth Bridge. There was one scuffle with police and a small group of counter-protesters materialised.

The following Saturday, a People’s Assembly march and rally was held. Whilst this was primarily directed against austerity and the government, Palestine featured prominently.

Over the past few days in London following the escalation involving Iran, another emergency morning protest took place outside the Foreign Office which lasted until mid-afternoon. That involved scuffles with police after two arrests had been made. Later, the same day there was another emergency meeting, this time outside Downing Street. This appeared to involve the same weary police officers.

On Saturday, when police had to deal with trooping the colour, yet another ‘emergency meeting’ in respect of Iran and Gaza was held in the afternoon on Parliament Square. This was followed by yet another protest on Sunday when pro-Palestine protesters converged on Whitehall from various parts of London.

This Saturday there is yet another major ‘national’ pro-Palestine march which, because of contentious events involving Iran, is likely to attract numbers well in excess of the normal 10 to 15,000.

There is, under current legislation, no power to ban these protests as they are unlikely to result in really serious disorder which is the yardstick for the imposition of such a ban.

Given the costs of policing such protests and the drain on police resources, there is now a case for there to be legislation which actually restricts the number of protests which can be held in respect of a particular theme or cause. Whilst those on the left would unquestionably object to such a restriction, the level of antipathy now being seen across social media may well mean that they might welcome the ability for such conditions to be imposed if the clearly visible and alarming current social media unrest extends to serious disorder on a scale that perhaps exceeds that of last summer.

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

Category: Public Order