repeal SOCPA - repeal laws to restrict protest and free assembly

In July 2007, Gordon Brown made a speech to the Commons in which he accepted the need to change the restrictions on protest around Parliament under SOCPA

After consultations, recommendations by parliamentary committees and the introduction of the draft legislation into 2 Bills under the Labour Government, the repeal of sections 132-138 of SOCPA is yet to happen. It has now part of the the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill which is going through Parliament during 2011. See below for the latest and the history.

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

16 January 2012: The High Court rules that it will allow a judicial review of the PRASRA restrictions to be heard in March.

See here for a court report

The court extends the injunction against Westminster Council acting to remove the claimant (Maria Gallestegui) until the judicial review in March. However, tents and other equipment from other campaigners in Parliament Square were removed in a huge police operation the same evening, as they are unprotected by the injunction.

15 January 2012: There is concern that new byelaws being drafted by Westminster Council, the GLA and the Government are seeking to extend the restrictions under PRASRA to a much wider area.

See details here

December 2011: PRASRA restrictions on protest in force while the repeal of SOCPA not until March 2012

Protesters in Parliament Square have received notice to leave while they remain authorised to continue their demonstrations under SOCPA until March 2012. Why is the repeal of s132 of SOCPA delayed! The protesters successfully get an injunction against action being taken against them until January.

September 2011: The new restrictions on protest around Parliament are passed through Parliament and given Royal Assent See here

See more on the concerns about the new legislation

February 2011: Despite a number of serious concerns raised by Liberty, others and from within the committee, the Public Bill Committee on the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill votes though the restrictions on protest around Parliament included in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

See the committee debates and submissions of written evidence

March 2011: on 30 and 31 March 2011, the House of Commons will be debating the clauses in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill that propose new laws restricting protest.

This legislation would put in place unaccountable and disproportionate measures.

From Liberty:

"However as with the original SOCPA provisions, these proposals in this Bill similarly, sinisterly and disproportionately target particular protests and protesters."

"Given the powers currently on the statute book, the Government has yet to argue convincingly that parliamentarians need additional protections from peaceful protest. It goes almost without saying that protests will commonly have the effect of irritating those they seek to influence and, from time to time, inadvertently inconveniencing those they do not. But when framing restrictions to the right to protest, irritation and inconvenience must not be seen as a trump card. While lengthy and noisy protests obviously have the power to cause greater embarrassment to the Executive this is no reason for making possession of loudspeakers and sleeping equipment a criminal act."

Contact your MP and ask them to raise these issues in the debate. See more here.

January 2011: THE GOOD NEWS: The repeal of Section 132-138 of SOCPA is introduced (again) in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

THE BAD NEWS: the Bill also proposes new laws restricting protest around Parliament that are unaccountable and disproportionate.

Any ‘authorised person’ can use ‘reasonable force’ against a member of the public to make them comply with a 'direction' to stop a 'prohibited activity' (having/using a tent/sleeping equipment/amplified noise). What would effectively be on-the-spot injunctions could not be challenged, must be complied with immediately, can be long-standing and lead to a criminal conviction and a heavy fine if not complied with.

What to do
The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill Committee are inviting submissions (by 17 February) which can be emailed in.

Write to your MP about your concerns and ask them to raise them when the Bill is debated in the House of Commons – www.writetothem.com

See more on the proposals and what to do about them here.

26 January 2010: Government publishes response to the Joint Commitee on Human Rights 'Demonstrating Respect for Rights? Follow Up' report - confirms intention to repeal SOCPA and introduce new restrictions

Regarding the Tamil protests in 2009 "As that protest showed, a compulsory prior notification scheme is impractical when communities feel very strongly about an issue and want to make their views known."

Regarding "requirements" that would be contained in secondary legislation imposing new restrictions on protest around Parliament "We have consulted the Metropolitan Police and the House Authorities on the specific requirements that must be met and we intend to provide the House with a draft order for scrutiny at Committee stage of the Bill."

The report also covers containment, dialogue between police and protestors, treatment of journalists, identification of officers, human rights awareness, counter terrorism powers, civil injunctions, quasi-public space and other issues

Read the report

Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill

18 January 2010: Concerns about new legislation to replace SOCPA restrictions on protest around Parliament

New restrictions on protest are being introduced under the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill. These will replace the infamous sections of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 which ban unauthorised protest around Parliament and which will be repealed under the new legislation.

The Joint Committee on Human Rights today published its legislative scrutiny of the Bill which states, "Some details of the proposed replacement provisions give us cause for concern, as they are, in parts, widely drafted and may result in legal uncertainty."

However, the concerns raised by the JCHR do not go far enough. The details of the new measures affecting protest around Parliament will be significantly determined by secondary legislation. This will create a lack of clarity for the public and leave the door open for further restrictions on protest to be put in place. The Government have argued for flexibility (see the JCHR report) but how are the public to reasonably know what the situation is, and if it changes?

The proposed designated area of up to 250m is far too extensive for the purposes of the legislation ("maintaining of access to and from the Palace of Westminster"), extending well beyond Parliament Square and a significant part of Whitehall.

As under SOCPA, there will be too much scope for the legislation to be enforced in an inconsistent manner, suggesting that the police make judgments as to which protests are acceptable.

Read these briefings for more:
Liberty’s Briefing on the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill for Committee Stage in the House of Commons, October 2009 (PDF)
"It is unnecessary and disproportionate to seek to allow increased circumstances contained in secondary legislation and therefore lacking full Parliamentary debate, where conditions can be imposed on
assemblies and processions around Westminster."

"Liberty does not believe that the proposed new provisions are in any way necessary."

Written evidence to the JCHR from Voices UK
Submission to the JCHR from CAMPACC

See the Bill (clause 35 and schedule 5)

20 July 2009: The Government reintroduces the repeal of s132 of SOCPA in the new Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill but strengthens existing public order legislation around Parliament

From the explanatory notes:
"Clause 32 of the Bill provides for the repeal of sections 132 to 138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005, thereby removing the distinct legislative framework for the policing of demonstrations around Parliament. Repeal of these sections will remove the requirement to give notice of demonstrations in the designated area around Parliament and the offence of holding such demonstrations without the authorisation of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.

Clause 32 also gives effect to Schedule 4 which inserts new powers on maintaining access to Parliament into Part 2 of the Public Order Act 1986. Those provisions give the police discretionary powers to impose conditions on public processions or assemblies around Parliament in order to maintain access to and from the Palace of Westminster. Conditions may be imposed only where in the senior officer’s reasonable opinion they are necessary for ensuring that specified requirements are met in relation to maintaining access to Parliament. The requirements which may be specified in a Statutory Instrument might include requirements as to the number or location of entrances to the Palace of Westminster which must be kept open, and to and from which there must always be an access route for pedestrians and vehicles through the area around Parliament. "
See the Bill
See here for some initial analysis

28 July 2009: Demonstrating Respect for Rights? Follow-up
The JCHR's second report on policing and protests in the wake of the G20 protest. This report also provides an update on protest around Parliament, the use of counterterrorism powers and civil injunctions, Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, protest in quasi-public space and the taking and retention of photographs. Read report See analysis

14 May 2009: Emergency legislation proposed to restrict protests in Parliament Square - again!
"The proposals have been drawn up by parliament speaker, Michael Martin with consultation from Westminster Council, the Home Office, City Hall and the Metropolitan Police....Proposals were drawn up during an emergency meeting to give police the power to move people on from the square and to make it illegal for demonstrators to camp out overnight....Westminster Council hopes the legislation can be passed before parliamentary recess in June. It would affect all protesters including veteran peace campaigner Brian Haw....Westminster Council is also prepared to hand over ownership of the pavements surrounding the green to the Greater London Authority (GLA) - making any protest camp on the sidewalk illegal." Read the full article

Looks like Parliament are using the Tamil situation as an opportunity to clamp down on Brian Haw and break out of the SOCPA impasse. Judging from what happens around Trafalgar Square, If the streets around Parliament fall into the ownership of the GLA, no-one will be able to protest without their permission.

April 2009: In the aftermath of the concern over the policing of the G20 protests the Joint Committee on Human Rights reopened it Policing and Protest inquiry. more details.

April 2009: the Government made an initial and very short response to the JCHR stating that the Government "remains committed to the repeal of sections 132-138 of Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 governing protest around Parliament". See details.

March 2009: Lord Tyler (Lib Dem) introduced his Constitutional Renewal Bill as a Private Members Bill as a 'wake up call' to reintroduce the reforms contained in the Government's Constitutional Renewal Bill, including repeal of the ban on unauthorised protest around Parliament. see more

Joint Committee on Human Rights inquiry into Policing and Protest and report

On 23 March 2009 the Joint Committee on Human Rights published the findings of its inquiry on 'Policing and Protest'. Amongst a number of legal and operational changes which the committee identified to address a range of 'concerns' over the way protests are policed, the report calls for the repeal of sections 132-138 of SOCPA which restrict protest around Parliament.

However, the report also calls for additional police powers under s14 of the Public Order Act around Parliament and suggests that a 'designated area' up to 300 metres from Parliament, specified by the Secretary of State, would be acceptable even though this would extend well beyond Parliament Square and beyond Downing Street. The report also suggests a limited amendment to s128 SOCPA relating to criminal trespass at designated sites. The Committee announced their intention to table amendments to the Policing and Crime Bill to prompt debate and 'bring forward the necessary reform' of SOCPA relating to protest around Parliament.

See more on the report's recommendations relating to SOCPA and other laws and practices restricting freedom of assembly and speech

Read the report: Demonstrating respect for rights? A human rights approach to policing protest html pdf. Read the Oral and Written Evidence, including a number of submissions from campaign groups and individuals html pdf.

From the report: "In addition to its positive duty, the state is required not to restrict protests unless it is justified as being both necessary and proportionate to do so in pursuance of a legitimate aim: this is a high threshold. Whilst protests may be disruptive or inconvenient, the presumption should be in favour of protests taking place without state interference, unless compelling evidence can be provided of legitimate reasons for any restrictions and those restrictions go no further than is strictly necessary to achieve their aim."

Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill - committee and report and progress of the Bill

In March 2008 the Government published the White Paper, 'The Governance of Britain – Constitutional Renewal' and the draft Constitutional Renewal Bill 2008. Part 1 on 'Demonstrations in the Vicinity of Parliament' sets out the repeal of sections 132-138 of SOCPA and deletes reference to SOCPA under the Serious Crime Act 2007 (paragraph 64). The draft bill also sets out a wider programme related to the Governance of Britain. See here for analysis of the repeal announcement.

See the House of Commons debate and the House of Lords debate when the Constitutional Renewal Bill was introduced.

May 2008: the Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill issues Call for Evidence.

31 July 2008: the Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill published its Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill report. The report supports repeal of section 132-138 of SOCPA but states that, "Before these sections are repealed, further work needs to be done to create a framework to ensure the police have adequate powers."

Read the report: Joint Committee on the Draft Constitutional Renewal Bill html pdf
Oral and Written Evidence, including a number of submissions from campaign groups and individuals html pdf.

December 2008: the Constitutional Renewal Bill (see below) is not included in the Queen's Speech

January 2009: The Government is yet to respond to the Constitutional Renewal Bill Committee's report (see below). No repeal of s132 of SOCPA in sight.

Vernon Coaker (Minister of State (Policing, Crime & Security) stated that "The Ministry of Justice is co-ordinating the Government's response to the report of the Joint Committee on the draft Constitutional Renewal Bill. We continue to give careful consideration to the recommendations on protests around Parliament which are set out in the Joint Committee's report and a full response will be published ahead of the Constitutional Renewal Bill's introduction to Parliament.

The Government are keen to give a substantial response to the Joint Committee but this has meant resolving all outstanding policy issues before the Bill is introduced. We recognise that there has been a long period since the publication of the report, but believe it is better to respond fully to the committee's recommendations on all aspects of the draft Bill. We intend to respond as early as possible in 2009."

Public consultation on 'Managing Protests around Parliament', 2007

In October 2007, the Home Office published a consultation document on 'Managing Protests Around Parliament'. Also see campaigning information relating to the consultation.

On 25 March 2008 the Home Office published its analysis of the public consultation 'The Governance of Britain – Analysis of Consultations'. The Government announced that restrictions on protest around Parliament will be repealed ... but what will replace it?

"Managing Protest around Parliament: The Government proposes the repeal of sections 132-138 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. Repeal of these sections will remove the requirement to give notice of demonstrations in the designated area around Parliament. It will also remove the offence for such demonstrations to be held without the authorisation of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner. "
'The Governance of Britain – Constitutional Renewal', March 2008

However, Jack Straw left the way open for restrictions to creep back in, saying, 'Our view is that Parliament itself is best placed to decide what needs to be secured to ensure Members are able freely to discharge their responsibilities'. While we need to continue to campaign against repressive legislation and practices, this announcement represents an inspiring, if yet to be fully realised, victory for everyone who spoke out, and stood up, against these restrictions on freedom of speech.
See the announcement of the repeal of sections 132-138 of SOCPA

See consultation campaigning information and analysis of the results

Public Demonstrations (Repeals) Bill [HL 12] 2006

In November 2006, The Liberal Democrat Peer, Baroness Susan Miller introduced a Private Members Bill in the House of Lords. The Bill sought to repeal sections 128 to 131 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (which criminalises trespass on ‘designated sites’ around military bases); sections 132 to 138 of SOCPA (banning unauthorised demonstrations in the vicinity of Parliament); and section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2006 (c.11) (trespassing etc on nuclear sites). It would also have revoked the Orders made by the Home Secretary relating to the definition of these ‘designated areas’ and ‘designated sites’. See the Bill.

On 26 January 2007, the Bill got a second reading in the House of Lords. There was a very interesting debate which brought out many of the issues relating to why the restrictions on protest under SOCPA need to be repealed. See the debate.