Is right to protest taking an ominous direction?

It is ironic that a man who was standing for the Portsmouth City Council elections should be among dozens of anti-monarchy protesters arrested on Saturday. (see our story on page 5)

He had been standing as a representative for the Green Party in Portsmouth a mere two days earlier.

Southsea resident, Elliott Lee, had stood in the St Thomas ward.

The bill under which he was held was introduced by Suella Braverman and was passed by parliament on

April 28. Needless to say it has sparked plenty of controversy.

The Act gives police forces broad authority to place restrictions on protests and public assembly.

Under previous legislation, police had to show that a protest may cause ‘serious public disorder, serious damage to property or serious disruption to the life of the community’ before imposing any restrictions.

However under the new act, police forces are allowed to place restrictions on protests they believe would otherwise constitute an existing offence of public nuisance, including imposing starting and finishing times and noise limits, and be able to consider actions by one individual as protests under provisions of the Act. Protesters disobeying such instructions from the police may be committing a criminal offence.

It is interesting to note that the law also makes it illegal for protesters to use equipment to secure themselves to things like railings.

In Mr Lee’s case, police found a megaphone on him which they deemed could be used to disrupt the procession. Under the new law this is an acceptable sign that disruption may occur.

There is no doubt that this law processes Orwellian undertones.

Regardless of whether or not you agree with Mr Lee’s viewpoint regarding the monarchy, he should have the right to air his views unhindered.

With such a law, the question arises as to where the country is heading?