5 ms·

Similar nonsense going on the UK with the new "Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act"[0]. Ostensibly it's been written to crack down on the type of attention

Similar nonsense going on the UK with the new "Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act"[0]. Ostensibly it's been written to crack down on the type of attention-grabbing climate protests we've seen recently with people blocking motorway traffic, disrupting major public events etc., but (leaving aside the question of whether these types of protests should be stopped, or whether the existing legal structure isn't enough to stop them anyway) the law contains some preposterously vague wording that should alarm anyone who cares about the right to protest in a democracy. For example, it outlaws "intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance" - a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Big-Brother-Watch-briefing-on-the-Police-Crime-Sentencing-and-Courts-Bill-House-of-Lords-Report-Stage-Fi7039.pdf https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Bi...

wolverine876 3y ago
> Ostensibly it's been written to crack down on the type of attention-grabbing climate protests we've seen recently with people blocking motorway traffic, disrupting major public events etc., but the law contains some preposterously vague wording that should alarm anyone who cares about the right to protest in a democracy. Is the ostensible reason sufficient? Isn't that just as oppressive?
lelanthran 3y ago
> For example, it outlaws "intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance" - a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? Well, it's a balancing act. The people who are being impacted by the "nuisance" might disagree about the protesters distinction between "protest" and "nuisance". Everyone should be free to air their grievances; however the right to voice your grievance does not automatically trump someone else's right to ignore it.
nmfisher 3y ago
> a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? Err, not really? When I was living in Australia I was aware of countless non-disruptive protests (usually outside various Parliament Houses, but sometimes through public areas like the main street). Gluing yourself to a road isn't a human right. If you want to protest, go do it on the footpath.
- swores 3y ago
  We already had laws against that. The new law can count those protests you've seen as a "nuisance" just because seeing/hearing the protest disturbed you as you walked past.
  - nmfisher 3y ago
    According to news articles, the law applies to someone who "intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct that obstructs the free passage of a public place". It's not about nuisance, it's about protests that prevent other people from passing through a public space. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
rob74 3y ago
Is this the one that was passed days before the coronation and was promptly used to arrest anti-monarchy protesters because they were carrying "lock-on devices" (one of these devices being a piece of string)?
- ninjin 3y ago
  Yes, and you can see how the Met made a complete and utter mess not just with Republic but a number of others as well: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/17/senior-met-officer-denies-political-pressure-to-arrest-king-charles-coronation-protesters https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/17/senior-met-o... From memory, they managed to at the very least arrest: a rape prevention squad, a royalist adjacent to protesters, a study group on non-violent protest that were in a building far away from any action, and republicans that had been in contact and notified the police in advance of their intention to protest. What a complete and utter bunch of muppets, yet they keep parroting the line “But the event was once in a lifetime!” which they more or less nicked from the politicians behind the bill.
Nursie 3y ago
> a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? I'm not sure anything is much of a protest. If Tony Blair can ignore a million on the street demanding the UK doesn't invade Iraq, what hope is there for any protest? But beyond that, how much a nuisance do you support people being able to make, and for what causes? Can I shut down all major routes into and out of London with a relative handful of people, because I righteously believe that gov.uk shouldn't use google analytics? Or because I want to protest mind control chips in vaccines? And if I do, should I be able to walk away with no legal consequences? I agree, the new laws in the UK are fucking awful, as is what happened to the anti-monarchy protestors a few weeks back, but equally democratic protest has to respect everyone else's right not to care and just get on with their day. If it genuinely is about getting ideas across, that is. The cynic in me sees protest as a useful way to keep agitators busy while giving them a way to let it all out and make themselves feel good...

wolverine876 3y ago

> Ostensibly it's been written to crack down on the type of attention-grabbing climate protests we've seen recently with people blocking motorway traffic, disrupting major public events etc., but the law contains some preposterously vague wording that should alarm anyone who cares about the right to protest in a democracy. Is the ostensible reason sufficient? Isn't that just as oppressive?

lelanthran 3y ago

> For example, it outlaws "intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance" - a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? Well, it's a balancing act. The people who are being impacted by the "nuisance" might disagree about the protesters distinction between "protest" and "nuisance". Everyone should be free to air their grievances; however the right to voice your grievance does not automatically trump someone else's right to ignore it.

nmfisher 3y ago

> a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? Err, not really? When I was living in Australia I was aware of countless non-disruptive protests (usually outside various Parliament Houses, but sometimes through public areas like the main street). Gluing yourself to a road isn't a human right. If you want to protest, go do it on the footpath.

swores 3y ago
We already had laws against that. The new law can count those protests you've seen as a "nuisance" just because seeing/hearing the protest disturbed you as you walked past.
- nmfisher 3y ago
  According to news articles, the law applies to someone who "intentionally or recklessly engages in conduct that obstructs the free passage of a public place". It's not about nuisance, it's about protests that prevent other people from passing through a public space. Seems pretty reasonable to me.

rob74 3y ago

Is this the one that was passed days before the coronation and was promptly used to arrest anti-monarchy protesters because they were carrying "lock-on devices" (one of these devices being a piece of string)?

ninjin 3y ago
Yes, and you can see how the Met made a complete and utter mess not just with Republic but a number of others as well: https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/17/senior-met-officer-denies-political-pressure-to-arrest-king-charles-coronation-protesters https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/may/17/senior-met-o... From memory, they managed to at the very least arrest: a rape prevention squad, a royalist adjacent to protesters, a study group on non-violent protest that were in a building far away from any action, and republicans that had been in contact and notified the police in advance of their intention to protest. What a complete and utter bunch of muppets, yet they keep parroting the line “But the event was once in a lifetime!” which they more or less nicked from the politicians behind the bill.

Nursie 3y ago

> a protest that doesn't cause "nuisance" isn't much of a protest, is it? I'm not sure anything is much of a protest. If Tony Blair can ignore a million on the street demanding the UK doesn't invade Iraq, what hope is there for any protest? But beyond that, how much a nuisance do you support people being able to make, and for what causes? Can I shut down all major routes into and out of London with a relative handful of people, because I righteously believe that gov.uk shouldn't use google analytics? Or because I want to protest mind control chips in vaccines? And if I do, should I be able to walk away with no legal consequences? I agree, the new laws in the UK are fucking awful, as is what happened to the anti-monarchy protestors a few weeks back, but equally democratic protest has to respect everyone else's right not to care and just get on with their day. If it genuinely is about getting ideas across, that is. The cynic in me sees protest as a useful way to keep agitators busy while giving them a way to let it all out and make themselves feel good...