By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
If only the police would show the same kind of collective backbone as they did when they threw their collective toys out of the pram over the (seemingly justified) prosecution of a fellow officer.
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:24 - Jul 5 by Zx1988
If only the police would show the same kind of collective backbone as they did when they threw their collective toys out of the pram over the (seemingly justified) prosecution of a fellow officer.
"People holding signs referencing Palestine Action have been arrested by police a day after the group was banned as a terrorist organisation.
More than two dozen people gathered close to the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Parliament Square in London on Saturday, holding signs that appeared to express support for the group.
At about 1.40pm, Metropolitan police officers began arresting people who were holding the signs."
It's madness, and makes a mockery of the law given they could well be charged under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, as could anyone on TWTD expressing support. The maximum penalty is 14 years.
Section 12 is as follow.
12. Support (1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he invites support for a proscribed organisation, and
(b)the support is not, or is not restricted to, the provision of money or other property (within the meaning of section 15).
(1A) A person commits an offence if the person—
(a)expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
(b) in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.]
(2) A person commits an offence if he arranges, manages or assists in arranging or managing a meeting which he knows is—
(a) to support a proscribed organisation,
(b) to further the activities of a proscribed organisation, or
(c to be addressed by a person who belongs or professes to belong to a proscribed organisation.
(3) A person commits an offence if he addresses a meeting and the purpose of his address is to encourage support for a proscribed organisation or to further its activities.
(4) Where a person is charged with an offence under subsection (2)(c) in respect of a private meeting it is a defence for him to prove that he had no reasonable cause to believe that the address mentioned in subsection (2)(c) would support a proscribed organisation or further its activities.
(5) In subsections (2) to (4)—
(a) “meeting” means a meeting of three or more persons, whether or not the public are admitted, and
(b) a meeting is private if the public are not admitted.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding [14] years, to a fine or to both, or
(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both.
[Post edited 5 Jul 15:39]
0
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:43 - Jul 5 with 1780 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:32 - Jul 5 by DJR
This is the Guardian report.
"People holding signs referencing Palestine Action have been arrested by police a day after the group was banned as a terrorist organisation.
More than two dozen people gathered close to the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Parliament Square in London on Saturday, holding signs that appeared to express support for the group.
At about 1.40pm, Metropolitan police officers began arresting people who were holding the signs."
It's madness, and makes a mockery of the law given they could well be charged under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, as could anyone on TWTD expressing support. The maximum penalty is 14 years.
Section 12 is as follow.
12. Support (1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he invites support for a proscribed organisation, and
(b)the support is not, or is not restricted to, the provision of money or other property (within the meaning of section 15).
(1A) A person commits an offence if the person—
(a)expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
(b) in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.]
(2) A person commits an offence if he arranges, manages or assists in arranging or managing a meeting which he knows is—
(a) to support a proscribed organisation,
(b) to further the activities of a proscribed organisation, or
(c to be addressed by a person who belongs or professes to belong to a proscribed organisation.
(3) A person commits an offence if he addresses a meeting and the purpose of his address is to encourage support for a proscribed organisation or to further its activities.
(4) Where a person is charged with an offence under subsection (2)(c) in respect of a private meeting it is a defence for him to prove that he had no reasonable cause to believe that the address mentioned in subsection (2)(c) would support a proscribed organisation or further its activities.
(5) In subsections (2) to (4)—
(a) “meeting” means a meeting of three or more persons, whether or not the public are admitted, and
(b) a meeting is private if the public are not admitted.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding [14] years, to a fine or to both, or
(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both.
[Post edited 5 Jul 15:39]
The issue is not the police here. It is the proscribing of an organisation which was not committing or condoning terrorist acts.
7
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:44 - Jul 5 with 1774 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:32 - Jul 5 by DJR
This is the Guardian report.
"People holding signs referencing Palestine Action have been arrested by police a day after the group was banned as a terrorist organisation.
More than two dozen people gathered close to the statue of Mahatma Gandhi in Parliament Square in London on Saturday, holding signs that appeared to express support for the group.
At about 1.40pm, Metropolitan police officers began arresting people who were holding the signs."
It's madness, and makes a mockery of the law given they could well be charged under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, as could anyone on TWTD expressing support. The maximum penalty is 14 years.
Section 12 is as follow.
12. Support (1) A person commits an offence if—
(a) he invites support for a proscribed organisation, and
(b)the support is not, or is not restricted to, the provision of money or other property (within the meaning of section 15).
(1A) A person commits an offence if the person—
(a)expresses an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation, and
(b) in doing so is reckless as to whether a person to whom the expression is directed will be encouraged to support a proscribed organisation.]
(2) A person commits an offence if he arranges, manages or assists in arranging or managing a meeting which he knows is—
(a) to support a proscribed organisation,
(b) to further the activities of a proscribed organisation, or
(c to be addressed by a person who belongs or professes to belong to a proscribed organisation.
(3) A person commits an offence if he addresses a meeting and the purpose of his address is to encourage support for a proscribed organisation or to further its activities.
(4) Where a person is charged with an offence under subsection (2)(c) in respect of a private meeting it is a defence for him to prove that he had no reasonable cause to believe that the address mentioned in subsection (2)(c) would support a proscribed organisation or further its activities.
(5) In subsections (2) to (4)—
(a) “meeting” means a meeting of three or more persons, whether or not the public are admitted, and
(b) a meeting is private if the public are not admitted.
(6) A person guilty of an offence under this section shall be liable—
(a) on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding [14] years, to a fine or to both, or
(b) on summary conviction, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to both.
[Post edited 5 Jul 15:39]
Yet, I could Legally stand in Parliament Square and shout support of the IDF, who have slaughtered 10s of thousands of innocent women and children. WTF?
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:44 - Jul 5 by noggin
Yet, I could Legally stand in Parliament Square and shout support of the IDF, who have slaughtered 10s of thousands of innocent women and children. WTF?
It's a tricky one, even for me.
We don't want a situation whereby the police make their own decisions as to which laws are correct and should be enforced but, at the same time, I'd argue that we do want a constabulary that will refuse to enforce egregious over-steps such as this.
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:24 - Jul 5 by Zx1988
If only the police would show the same kind of collective backbone as they did when they threw their collective toys out of the pram over the (seemingly justified) prosecution of a fellow officer.
When you say collective backbone, you’re referring to the 100 firearm officers who downed arms, which was 0.3% of the met population of over 33k officers.
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 15:43 - Jul 5 by redrickstuhaart
The issue is not the police here. It is the proscribing of an organisation which was not committing or condoning terrorist acts.
And it is the proscribing that I object to, as I have done frequently on another thread. But it is not just me. Peter Hain has done the same, as have various human rights organisations, including Amnesty International.
Of course, there are two things that could emerge here. First, they are not charged at all. Or if charged, they are given a much lower sentence than would be the case if they were supporting, say, Islamic State. And it is those possibilities (as well as the possibility of these type of protests continuing) that I was trying to suggest could end up making a mockery of the law, and draw one to the conclusion that Palestine Action was never really the sort of organisation that the Terrorism Act 2000 was designed for.
[Post edited 5 Jul 18:21]
0
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:13 - Jul 5 with 1580 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:07 - Jul 5 by DJR
And it is the proscribing that I object to, as I have done frequently on another thread. But it is not just me. Peter Hain has done the same, as have various human rights organisations, including Amnesty International.
Of course, there are two things that could emerge here. First, they are not charged at all. Or if charged, they are given a much lower sentence than would be the case if they were supporting, say, Islamic State. And it is those possibilities (as well as the possibility of these type of protests continuing) that I was trying to suggest could end up making a mockery of the law, and draw one to the conclusion that Palestine Action was never really the sort of organisation that the Terrorism Act 2000 was designed for.
[Post edited 5 Jul 18:21]
I've tried to keep an open mind about this Labour government, but bloody hell they are a disappointment so far.
They somehow managed to find at least one thing to irritate almost every section of UK society about. That's quite an achievement.
I was born underwater, I dried out in the sun.
I started humping volcanoes baby, when I was too young.
In a statement on X, the Met said: “Officers have arrested more than 20 people on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act 2000. They have been taken into custody. Palestine Action is a proscribed group and officers will act where criminal offences are committed.”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said: “We commend the counter-terrorism police for their decisive action in protecting the people of London from some cardboard signs opposing the genocide in Gaza and expressing support for those taking action to prevent it. It’s a relief to know that counter-terrorism police have nothing better to do.”
An environmental campaigner, Donnachadh McCarthy, said: “To proscribe an organisation of peaceful direct action as terrorists is a huge red line for our democracy. It means that all the rest of us, whether we’re climate activists, Greenpeace, women’s suffragettes, disabled activists, it means that the government can now declare any act of property damage to be terrorism, which gives you a sentence of 14 years.
“This is worse than Putin’s Russia. I don’t say that lightly. It’s 10 years for doing what we’re doing today in Russia; it’s 14 years in the UK, because of Yvette Cooper’s outrageous betrayal of democracy, liberalism, and what is in my view a step towards fascism.”
A retired priest, Sue Parfitt, 82, said the group’s ban was “a very dangerous move that has to be challenged”.
“We are losing our civil liberties, we must stop that for everybody’s sake. Whatever you want to protest about,” she said.
4
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:33 - Jul 5 with 1486 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:13 - Jul 5 by Dubtractor
I've tried to keep an open mind about this Labour government, but bloody hell they are a disappointment so far.
They somehow managed to find at least one thing to irritate almost every section of UK society about. That's quite an achievement.
There have been some bad faith reporting, bad decisions and some bad communication all compounding the weaknesses of this government. However, it's worrying that they are in a position where they need quell rebellion in a majority that's seemingly so large as to be unmanageable for them.
What worries me about this, is that the Israeli government, the weapons manufacturers and pro-Israeli lobbies were consulted on this, but not the other side. A quick look into what PA have done in terms of damage makes it hard to justify their criminal damage etc. But it does feel like they're a conflation of criminal into terrorist and I don't understand the justification fully.
Given the current appetite for "but what about them?" it does boggle the mind that Reform and the like weren't proscribed after Southport etc and makes it look like for a man so passionate and storied in the intricacies of law, Starmer isn't strong enough on it being manipulated here.
Clearly the threat of the media machine behind the Far Right and likelihood of massive unrest and violence that would ensue, makes it hard to envy him making that call. But if a keffiyah is a symbol of extremism then why not a trackie?
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:39 - Jul 5 by noggin
The British public should be outraged at this. Sadly I don't see that.
Is hardly new, the police tactics against protesters during the King's coronation were widely supported despite being unlawful.
Sarah Everard memorial was similar.
Twtd is remarkably authoritarian and supportive of the police irrespective of them over reaching their powers.
That said, on this occasion I don't think they have over stepped their powers. This is what the govt. did in prescribing a non violent (to people) protest group.
That the police are incapable on the ground of behaving sensibly when using their powers, well I guess they are in a hard position but when you are arresting an 80 year old vicar you do wonder how in earth we got there.
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:30 - Jul 5 by DJR
From the Guardian.
In a statement on X, the Met said: “Officers have arrested more than 20 people on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act 2000. They have been taken into custody. Palestine Action is a proscribed group and officers will act where criminal offences are committed.”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said: “We commend the counter-terrorism police for their decisive action in protecting the people of London from some cardboard signs opposing the genocide in Gaza and expressing support for those taking action to prevent it. It’s a relief to know that counter-terrorism police have nothing better to do.”
An environmental campaigner, Donnachadh McCarthy, said: “To proscribe an organisation of peaceful direct action as terrorists is a huge red line for our democracy. It means that all the rest of us, whether we’re climate activists, Greenpeace, women’s suffragettes, disabled activists, it means that the government can now declare any act of property damage to be terrorism, which gives you a sentence of 14 years.
“This is worse than Putin’s Russia. I don’t say that lightly. It’s 10 years for doing what we’re doing today in Russia; it’s 14 years in the UK, because of Yvette Cooper’s outrageous betrayal of democracy, liberalism, and what is in my view a step towards fascism.”
A retired priest, Sue Parfitt, 82, said the group’s ban was “a very dangerous move that has to be challenged”.
“We are losing our civil liberties, we must stop that for everybody’s sake. Whatever you want to protest about,” she said.
As someone who has been involved with protests in the past and someone who believes that the right to protest should be upheld, and the belief that many protests are often, in retrospective, often found to be on the right side of history I was concerned with the actions the Tory government were taking against protesters. The fact that its a labour government overstepping the line and using laws unjustly (imo) to proscribed a non violent group as terrorists is frankly shocking.
The people who protested today were testing this unjustified decision and showing what a mockery this use of terrorism laws are.
Knowing the steps government took to protect big business from animal rights campaigners back in 80s and 90s and how they pressured courts to be stricter in their sentences is being repeated again to protect big business.
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:47 - Jul 5 by Mullet
There have been some bad faith reporting, bad decisions and some bad communication all compounding the weaknesses of this government. However, it's worrying that they are in a position where they need quell rebellion in a majority that's seemingly so large as to be unmanageable for them.
What worries me about this, is that the Israeli government, the weapons manufacturers and pro-Israeli lobbies were consulted on this, but not the other side. A quick look into what PA have done in terms of damage makes it hard to justify their criminal damage etc. But it does feel like they're a conflation of criminal into terrorist and I don't understand the justification fully.
Given the current appetite for "but what about them?" it does boggle the mind that Reform and the like weren't proscribed after Southport etc and makes it look like for a man so passionate and storied in the intricacies of law, Starmer isn't strong enough on it being manipulated here.
Clearly the threat of the media machine behind the Far Right and likelihood of massive unrest and violence that would ensue, makes it hard to envy him making that call. But if a keffiyah is a symbol of extremism then why not a trackie?
A hearing is set for 21 July to hear an application by Palestine Action for permission for judicial review to quash the order.
An claim for interim relief (to quash the order) was made yesterday but failed, and interesting to note from the Guardian article that the judge said the following.
“I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.”
No doubt those arrested today would beg to differ.
[Post edited 5 Jul 17:16]
0
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 17:25 - Jul 5 with 1200 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 17:15 - Jul 5 by DJR
A hearing is set for 21 July to hear an application by Palestine Action for permission for judicial review to quash the order.
An claim for interim relief (to quash the order) was made yesterday but failed, and interesting to note from the Guardian article that the judge said the following.
“I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.”
No doubt those arrested today would beg to differ.
[Post edited 5 Jul 17:16]
The judge will have been applying very specific tests, case law in respect of urgent short notice interim relief and taking into account things like the opposition of government mandated actions designed to promote national security. The decision here is the Government's not the court's.
More specifically- this was a Judicial Review application (which continues) with interim relief sought. There are only very specific grounds on which a judicial review can be succesful. Very broadly, eithe rpubic bodies have not followed proper processes, or their decision is manifestly unreasonable or illogical.
When considering interim relief, the strength of the application will doubtless have been a relevant consideration. Whilst many of us firmly disagree with the decision, if the government can show their working, and that proper processes were followed, they will succeed.
[Post edited 5 Jul 17:30]
0
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 17:49 - Jul 5 with 1139 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 17:25 - Jul 5 by redrickstuhaart
The judge will have been applying very specific tests, case law in respect of urgent short notice interim relief and taking into account things like the opposition of government mandated actions designed to promote national security. The decision here is the Government's not the court's.
More specifically- this was a Judicial Review application (which continues) with interim relief sought. There are only very specific grounds on which a judicial review can be succesful. Very broadly, eithe rpubic bodies have not followed proper processes, or their decision is manifestly unreasonable or illogical.
When considering interim relief, the strength of the application will doubtless have been a relevant consideration. Whilst many of us firmly disagree with the decision, if the government can show their working, and that proper processes were followed, they will succeed.
[Post edited 5 Jul 17:30]
I bow to your superior knowledge on matters such as this. Indeed, the fact that the Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal suggests there were no proper grounds.
As it is, I don't hold out much hope for Palestine Action's application for judicial review being successful at the later hearing.
[Post edited 5 Jul 18:21]
0
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 17:49 - Jul 5 with 1137 views
Peaceful protesters arrested in Parliament Square. on 16:30 - Jul 5 by DJR
From the Guardian.
In a statement on X, the Met said: “Officers have arrested more than 20 people on suspicion of offences under the Terrorism Act 2000. They have been taken into custody. Palestine Action is a proscribed group and officers will act where criminal offences are committed.”
A spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said: “We commend the counter-terrorism police for their decisive action in protecting the people of London from some cardboard signs opposing the genocide in Gaza and expressing support for those taking action to prevent it. It’s a relief to know that counter-terrorism police have nothing better to do.”
An environmental campaigner, Donnachadh McCarthy, said: “To proscribe an organisation of peaceful direct action as terrorists is a huge red line for our democracy. It means that all the rest of us, whether we’re climate activists, Greenpeace, women’s suffragettes, disabled activists, it means that the government can now declare any act of property damage to be terrorism, which gives you a sentence of 14 years.
“This is worse than Putin’s Russia. I don’t say that lightly. It’s 10 years for doing what we’re doing today in Russia; it’s 14 years in the UK, because of Yvette Cooper’s outrageous betrayal of democracy, liberalism, and what is in my view a step towards fascism.”
A retired priest, Sue Parfitt, 82, said the group’s ban was “a very dangerous move that has to be challenged”.
“We are losing our civil liberties, we must stop that for everybody’s sake. Whatever you want to protest about,” she said.
If I’m understanding this correctly they were arrested for supporting the banned group, not for protesting? Clearly Palestine Action members involved in the MoD case should have been prosecuted, but proscribing them as terror group is an authoritarian move. But there seems to be some conflation here that they were arrested just for protesting and that doesn’t appear to be the case.
They could have held a pro Palestine rally and nothing would have happened? Knowing Palestine Action was now a proscribed organisation they’ve needlessly put the police in a difficult position. All seems very avoidable, and perhaps they carried it out for the publicity. The police are not at fault here, the government should never have made that call but they seem increasingly authoritarian.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
