Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Page 168

Helga Law Journal - 01.01.2021, Page 168
Helga Law Journal Vol. 1, 2021 172 International Legal Research Group 173 concerns.”267 This is an example of the ECHR contributing positively to the protection of the right to peaceful protest in the UK. Nevertheless, the criterion of “reasonable suspicion” may still be ambiguous and can permit potentially dangerous unnecessary restrictions. 5.2.4 Terrorism Terrorism is a particularly serious category of crime which the government should protect the public against. It can pose an existential threat to societies and can injure/kill a considerable number of people, although its emotive rhetoric can often exaggerate and multiply the real level of harm it causes.268 Particularly in the post-9/11 world, the very topic of terrorism generates the public perception that anything can – and should – be done in order to fight terrorism.269 Nevertheless, at the heart of terrorist legislation lies a very delicate balance between liberty, to which freedom of protest is an essential component, and security. The broad definition of “terrorism” arguably shifts the balance towards security270. This is demonstrated in R v Gul,271 which concerned the conviction of a law student under Section 2 of the Terrorism Act272 for “terrorist publications,” including publications which are likely to be understood as ‘a direct or indirect encouragement…to the commission, preparation, or instigation of acts of terrorism.’ The applicant was charged with Section 2273 after the police found videos on his computer, including those depicting terrorist attacks on the civilians. The case is crucial for the opinions of Lord Neuberger and Lord Judge who reluctantly accepted the “concerningly wide”274 definition of terrorism in Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which includes military attacks by a non- state armed group against any state or inter-governmental organization forces in the context of a non-international armed conflict. Such a wide interpretation can easily justify restrictions on protests through an appeal to terrorism, even where the nexus between the alleged offence and terrorism is not self-evident. For example, the trial of James Matthews, a former British soldier volunteer joining Kurdish forces to fight Islamic State group extremists, depicts that even military acts at the time approved by the government can later be condemned as terrorist 267 Ed Cape, The Counter-Terrorism Provision of the Protection of Freedom Act 2012: Preventing Misuse or a Case of Smoke and Mirrors, (2013) 4 Criminal Law Review. 268 David Anderson, “Shielding the compass: How to fight terrorism without defeating the law”, (2013), Journal of Politicial Philosophy. 269 Waldron, however, cautions his readers that we should be aware of the difference between the emotive appeal of the anti-terrorist legislation and the real impact of such legislation in the fight against terrorism. Jeremy Waldron, “Security and Liberty: The Image of Balance”, (2003), 195. 270 Ibid. 271 R v Gul (Appellant) 2013 UKSC 64. 272 Terrorism Act 2006, Section 2(3). 273 ibid. 274 ibid, 38. acts.275 While not a straightforward act of protest, his military activity may also be considered a form of protest against terrorism. Perhaps paradoxically, however, his ‘protest’ against terrorism was restricted in order to fight terrorism. In any case, his inclusion in the Terrorism Act 2000 demonstrates that justificatory grounds of fighting terrorism can cover protest, which one may not perceive as promoting terrorism. 5.2.5 Surveillance Recently, the right to freedom of protest has been restricted with increasing surveillance. This can be seen in a case recently brought by Liberty R (On the application of Wood) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.276 In order to be able to attend the AGMs, Wood bought a share in a company with links to arms trade. While there was no problem during the meeting, the police claimed that they saw him talking to a known arms industry protestor after the conference. The police surveilled Wood; upon his refusal to reveal his identity, he was tracked by the police to the underground station where they sought to discover his identity from his travel documents. Wood’s claim of a violation of Article 8 ECHR – the right to respect for private and family life – was rejected by the House of Lords. The case is currently on appeal to the ECtHR where the human rights organization, Liberty, has argued that “taking, storing and dissemination of photos of peaceful protesters is an unjustified interference with the right to private life.”277 The retention of such data also discourages potential future protestors, thereby harming the very exercise of the right. 5.3 Conclusion The most common justification for the restriction on the right to freedom of protest, as it has been shown, is the need to prevent/reduce the risk of crimes, and maintain public order in society. At the UK level, the police have various means at their disposal to realise these objectives, such as through kettling or stop-and-search powers.278 Overall, there is now a trend towards the specification and limitation of such powers, thereby also limiting the authorised justifications for the restriction on the right to liberty. Even then, many of the police powers and justifications for the restriction on the right to freedom of protest have been questioned by many human rights organisations. Essentially, this is a very controversial area, and justifying the restrictions on the right to protest involve striking a delicate balance between the need to maintain order 275 Lizzie Dearden, “James Matthews: Former British Army soldier who fought Isis in Syria now faces terror charge”, the Independent, (London, 7 February 2018) 276 Liberty R (On the application of Wood) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis 2009 EWCA Civ 414. 277 (n 9). 278 While section 44 stop-and-search powers are now repealed, the police authorities retain the liberty to question suspects, although now on more restricted grounds allowed by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
Page 33
Page 34
Page 35
Page 36
Page 37
Page 38
Page 39
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Page 43
Page 44
Page 45
Page 46
Page 47
Page 48
Page 49
Page 50
Page 51
Page 52
Page 53
Page 54
Page 55
Page 56
Page 57
Page 58
Page 59
Page 60
Page 61
Page 62
Page 63
Page 64
Page 65
Page 66
Page 67
Page 68
Page 69
Page 70
Page 71
Page 72
Page 73
Page 74
Page 75
Page 76
Page 77
Page 78
Page 79
Page 80
Page 81
Page 82
Page 83
Page 84
Page 85
Page 86
Page 87
Page 88
Page 89
Page 90
Page 91
Page 92
Page 93
Page 94
Page 95
Page 96
Page 97
Page 98
Page 99
Page 100
Page 101
Page 102
Page 103
Page 104
Page 105
Page 106
Page 107
Page 108
Page 109
Page 110
Page 111
Page 112
Page 113
Page 114
Page 115
Page 116
Page 117
Page 118
Page 119
Page 120
Page 121
Page 122
Page 123
Page 124
Page 125
Page 126
Page 127
Page 128
Page 129
Page 130
Page 131
Page 132
Page 133
Page 134
Page 135
Page 136
Page 137
Page 138
Page 139
Page 140
Page 141
Page 142
Page 143
Page 144
Page 145
Page 146
Page 147
Page 148
Page 149
Page 150
Page 151
Page 152
Page 153
Page 154
Page 155
Page 156
Page 157
Page 158
Page 159
Page 160
Page 161
Page 162
Page 163
Page 164
Page 165
Page 166
Page 167
Page 168
Page 169
Page 170
Page 171
Page 172
Page 173
Page 174
Page 175
Page 176
Page 177
Page 178
Page 179
Page 180
Page 181
Page 182
Page 183
Page 184
Page 185
Page 186
Page 187
Page 188
Page 189
Page 190
Page 191
Page 192
Page 193
Page 194
Page 195
Page 196
Page 197
Page 198
Page 199
Page 200
Page 201
Page 202
Page 203
Page 204
Page 205
Page 206
Page 207
Page 208
Page 209
Page 210
Page 211
Page 212
Page 213
Page 214
Page 215
Page 216
Page 217
Page 218
Page 219
Page 220
Page 221
Page 222
Page 223
Page 224

x

Helga Law Journal

Direct Links

If you want to link to this newspaper/magazine, please use these links:

Link to this newspaper/magazine: Helga Law Journal
https://timarit.is/publication/1677

Link to this issue:

Link to this page:

Link to this article:

Please do not link directly to images or PDFs on Timarit.is as such URLs may change without warning. Please use the URLs provided above for linking to the website.