In this country we pride ourselves on our long-established traditions of freedom of expression. These liberties consist not only of freedom of speech but also freedom of assembly.
The right to protest in public is a cornerstone of democracy. That is why peaceful marches are never banned and even controversial and disruptive ones are policed rather than blocked.
Only in the most exceptional circumstances do the authorities step in. The way the law works is clear: if a chief constable believes that there is a serious risk of disorder which the police will struggle to contain, he or she can ask the home secretary to ban a march. Even then, a static protest can take place.
• Who is the real Suella Braverman — and what does she want?
There is a debate to be had about whether other considerations should play a part in such decisions. Are some public displays so offensive that they deserve to be banned? Is there a level of disruption to the life of a city that is too great to justify a demonstration? Nevertheless, the law as it stands makes it clear that marches should almost always be permitted.
Advertisement
These issues have come into sharp focus because of what happened on October 7: the worst massacre of Jews since the Nazi era. The ramifications of that terrible event and all that has followed have been felt on the streets of the UK. There have been dignified vigils in London held by Britain’s Jewish community, but that is not what has tested our capacity to maintain public order.
It is the pro-Palestinian movement that has mobilised tens of thousands of angry demonstrators and marched them through London every weekend. From the start, these events have been problematic, not just because of violence around the fringes but because of the highly offensive content of chants, posters and stickers. This is not a time for naiveté. We have seen with our own eyes that terrorists have been valorised, Israel has been demonised as Nazis and Jews have been threatened with further massacres.
• Rishi Sunak’s cabinet reshuffle live: latest news and updates
Each weekend has been worse than the previous one. Last Saturday, in central London, police were attacked with fireworks, train services were brought to a halt by demonstrators and poppy sellers were mobbed and prevented from raising funds for veterans.
Now as we approach a particularly significant weekend in the life of our nation, one which calls for respect and commemoration, the hate marchers — a phrase I do not resile from — intend to use Armistice Day to parade through London in yet another show of strength.
Advertisement
Here we reach the heart of the matter. I do not believe that these marches are merely a cry for help for Gaza. They are an assertion of primacy by certain groups — particularly Islamists — of the kind we are more used to seeing in Northern Ireland. Also disturbingly reminiscent of Ulster are the reports that some of Saturday’s march group organisers have links to terrorist groups, including Hamas.
There will be time for proper discussion about how we got to this point. For now, the issue is how do we as a society police groups that insist that their agenda trumps any notion of the broader public good — as defined by the public, not by activists.
The answer must be: even-handedly. Unfortunately, there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protesters. During Covid, why was it that lockdown objectors were given no quarter by public order police yet Black Lives Matters demonstrators were enabled, allowed to break rules and even greeted with officers taking the knee?
Right-wing and nationalist protesters who engage in aggression are rightly met with a stern response yet pro-Palestinian mobs displaying almost identical behaviour are largely ignored, even when clearly breaking the law? I have spoken to serving and former police officers who have noted this double standard.
• Suella Braverman brands Met biased over Gaza march
Advertisement
Football fans are even more vocal about the tough way they are policed as compared to politically-connected minority groups who are favoured by the left. It may be that senior officers are more concerned with how much flak they are likely to get than whether this perceived unfairness alienates the majority. The government has a duty to take a broader view.
If the march goes ahead this weekend, the public will expect to see an assertive and proactive approach to any displays of hate, breaches of conditions and general disorder.
