In Britain, The Right To Protest Is Under Threat

Over recent months and in the very heart of London, hundreds of activists been arrested following protests. For example, a retiree faces up to two years in prison for holding a sign outside a courthouse reminding jurors of their right to acquit defendants. Similarly, an engineer has received a three-year prison sentence for hanging a banner reading “Just Stop Oil” off a bridge. Some have even been arrested simply for slowly walking down the street. This incidents point to the growing tensions felt within one of the world’s oldest democracies. According to the AP, hundreds of environmental activists have been arrested under the UK’s tough new law which restricts peaceful demonstrations. Political prisoners are not in a better situation. On November 25th, 2023 for instance, following the conflict between Hamas and Israel, hundreds of thousands of pro-Palestine protestors marched through central London in protest of the Israeli bombing of Gaza. Among them, many were arrested.

The United Kingdom, known for its centuries-old democratic institutions, is witnessing an alarming clampdown on the right to peaceful protest. The recent arrests of environmental and political activists indicate a significant shift in the nation’s approach to civil liberties.

Internationally, the response to the UK’s tightening grip on protest rights has ranged from concern to criticism, especially among fellow democracies where freedom of expression is a cherished value. The Conservative government’s justification for these stringent laws – to prevent extremist activities and economic disruption – aises questions about the balance between national security and individual freedoms.

Institutions and figures of authority within the UK, including the Conservative government, have played a pivotal role in this paradigm shift. By branding environmental activism as extremism and enacting laws which limit protest rights, they are reshaping the landscape of democratic dissent.

Despite the government’s efforts, the problem persists: the fundamental right to protest, a cornerstone of democracy, is being undermined. In the UK, a specific right in law for peaceful protests does not exist. However, it is enshrined in the rights of freedom of expression and freedom of assembly, which are protected respectively under articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, incorporated into domestic British law by the 1998 Human Rights Act.

The laws which limited protest rights, while aimed at maintaining public order and economic stability, have been critiqued for their disproportionate impact on civil liberties. The approach taken by the authorities reveals a troubling contradiction – a nation famed for its democratic traditions is now seen as curtailing the very freedoms it has long championed.

This heavy-handed response fails to address underlying tensions between the state’s duty to maintain order and its obligation to uphold democratic freedoms. It also overlooks the role of protest in fostering societal change and public discourse. Moreover, these actions have led to unintended consequences, such as the potential stifling of legitimate societal discourse and a growing mistrust in the government’s commitment to democratic principles.

The UK does not have a formally written constitution. Instead, its democratic system is underpinned by an “unwritten constitution” — a set of laws, rules, conventions, and judicial decisions accumulated over hundreds of years. Thus, the government must put restrictions on its power. As Andrew Blick, author of “Democratic Turbulence in the United Kingdom” and a political scientist at King’s College London, said, “We rely on self-restraint by governments. You hope the people in power are going to behave themselves.”

However, the need for a new approach is clear – one that respects the right to peaceful protest while addressing legitimate concerns about public order and safety. This approach should begin with a clear demarcation between lawful protest and actions that genuinely threaten public safety or cause significant disruption. Law enforcement and judicial systems should be guided by principles which prioritize dialogue and de-escalation over punitive measures.

Furthermore, the government should engage with civil society leaders, activists, and legal experts to develop a framework which protects the right to protest. This framework should include safeguards against the misuse of power and ensure that any restrictions are necessary, proportionate, and in line with international human rights standards.

Implementing these strategies will require a concerted effort from all sectors of society. Citizens must remain vigilant and active in safeguarding their democratic rights. Lawmakers should revisit existing legislation, ensuring that laws are not only effective in maintaining public order but also in preserving fundamental democratic principles.

In conclusion, the path forward for the UK is not through the suppression of dissent but rather through the strengthening of democratic dialogue and respect for civil liberties. Only through a balanced and respectful approach can the UK maintain its standing as a beacon of democracy in the modern world.

Related

This Month In Ukraine: More Reasons For Peaceful Negotiation

Rather than provide an exhaustive history of the decade long conflict between the West and Russia in Ukraine, this report serves to orient the reader as to why this conflagration no longer serves the purposes of democracy, human rights or freedom if it ever did. The greatest interests served by the continuing tragedy in Ukraine are the interests of the defense industries, investment firms and US hegemony. Ironically, as the United States becomes more entangled in Ukraine, governance under President Zelensky becomes increasingly less democratic and the United States becomes less and less powerful as a global hegemon. 

Read More »

Leave a Reply