'Facilitating Peaceful Protest' is the name of a new House of Lords and House of Commons' Joint Committee on Human Rights' 70-page report looking back at last year's student protests and looking toward the then forthcoming TUC-organised march against the cuts (26th March.) Copies are obtainable from the Stationery Office at £14.50 (HL paper 123 / HC684.) Not sure if you could order one via the public library; possibly you can.
If anyone finds this interesting and wants to post to me - I just need to let you know I shan't be posting any more unless I get the chance to go into an internet cafe, as I shan't be around for a while. I won't be deliberately ignoring you!
Anyhow, here are some bits and pieces from the report, which was published immediately before the recent, big TUC demonstration, highlighting concerns arising from the student demos; how they had been handled and lessons which should be learned. The report includes oral and written evidence from student leaders and senior police officers.
It's likely that it was the outcry from students, parents and other supporters which arose from their experience of police strategy in the pre-Christmas tuition fees demonstrations, which led to a better experience for demonstrators on 26th March than might otherwise have been the case.
On the Committee were Dr Hywel Francis, MP (Lab); Dr Julian Huppert , MP (LibDem); Mrs Eleanor Laing, MP (Con); Mr Dominic Raab, MP (Con); Mr Virendra Sharma, MP (Lab); Mr Richard Shepherd, MP (Con); Lord Bowness (Con); Baroness Campbell (Cross-Bencher); Lord Dubs (Lab); Lord Lester (LibDem); Lord Morris (Lab); and Baroness Stowell (Con).
People have rights. People involved in demonstrations have rights. The report's introduction clarifies what these are, namely: 1) The right to life (Article 2, European Convention on Human Rights); 2) the prohibition against inhuman or degrading treatment (Article 3, European Convention on Human rights); 3) The right to liberty (Article 5, European convention on Human Rights) and The right to respect for private life, which includes the right to physical autonomy (Article 8, European Convention on Human Rights.)
An important observation from the report, looking towards the then-imminent TUC March for the Alternative (26 March) stated 'We consider it the responsibility of demonstrators and organisers to recognise that failure to protest peacefully will require the police to take action, but there does appear to be a lack of clarity about the level or seriousness of the violence that must have occurred before containment or 'kettling' can be resorted to.'
Witnesses Aaron Porter, President of the NUS, and Simon Hardy, who is the spokesperson for the National Campaign against fees and cuts, spoke to the Joint Committee on Human Rights on 14th December last year - just five days after the last of the students' pre-Christmas demonstrations and the parliamentary vote which approved the trebling of tuition fees.
Aaron Porter told the committee he believed kettling on 24 November was not conducive to helping to manage a calm and peaceful protest. He hadn?t, himself, been at the 24 November demonstration but had reports from some students of unprovoked police aggression.
As for 30 November, when the National Campaign against Fees and Cuts' march took place and protestors 'ran away' from the police, it was important to understand what motivated this. He pointed out that if students were kettled on 24 November as so many were, they may have wanted to avoid being kettled on 30 November. He said that the NUS part of the 9 December demonstration went off successfully, but students were again kettled partway through the march led by the National Campaign against fees and Cuts. Aaron Porter wanted to know what steps, if any, were taken by police to identify troublemakers, remove them and allow those who wanted to protest peacefully, to do so.
Simon Hardy (of the naational Campaign against fees and cuts) began his report to the Committee by looking at the apparent attitude of some police officers. A website, inspectorgadget, which is an unofficial police blog discussion forum, had posted on it a video of Hardy at a press conference on 10 December, in which Hardy is seen condemning police violence.
Hardy described how this forum then has a number of people whom Hardy presumes are police bloggers, making comments such as how they would like to hurt Hardy by punching him repeatedly on the floor, stubbing flares out in his face and aiming for his eyes.
Requested to focus on the four demonstrations, Hardy said concern number one was kettling. Demonstrators, some of whom were very young, were kept in freezing cold conditions on Whitehall until half past nine or ten o'clock. The overwhelming feeling from students who attended follow up meetings discussing the 30 November and 9 December demonstrations was that they had to look at ways of being able to demonstrate without being imprisoned on the streets by the police for hours on end.
Concern number two was violence from the police, Hardy said. He had emails and newspaper reports showing police batoning students without cause, punching students who had their hands in the air, kicking students who were on the floor, and making horse charges. He pointed out that around 43 protestors were taken to hospital on 9 December, and added that Alfie Meadows, a Middlesex University student, underwent a three hour operation following a stroke subsequent to having been hit by a baton.
Some police covered up their identification numbers. A 9 December piece of video shows a female police officer in riot gear whose numbers could not be seen.
The final main point, said Hardy, was that the police lied. 'They lie when you're in kettles. I have lots of evidence of students stuck in kettles who were told by police to go to the other end where they would be allowed to leave, and then they were not allowed to leave. Police told demonstrators a number of different things, and this creates a real sense of mistrust in the police, when they trap people in kettles for so long.'
Lord Dubs asked about individual requests to be released and how these were handled, and about provision of water, toilets and medical assistance.
Hardy replied that on 24 November, there was no provision for food. The police told the media they were handing out water to people, but if so, this was not widely known; neither was the existence of a couple of toilets . When the chief steward of the demonstration tried to talk to the commander in charge, the steward said the commander was distinctly unhelpful and did not provide her with the information she was looking for.
A BBC News website report about the 9 December demonstration featured an interview with 17-year old Rachel Bergan from Barnsley, Hardy added. In it, Rachel says that the police let her go out of one kettle. After she'd been begging, in tears, to be let out, she and her friends got through one police line but were then halted by another. She said 'We were traumatised at this point. We were crying. We?d been hit by police for just wanting to go home. We were begging to, please just let us go home. The showed no mercy whatsoever. I managed to break away.' The police came at them and Rachel said she was pushed into a ditch by a police officer, and when she tried to get out of the ditch he pushed her back in. Rachel then turned around to see a group of her friends on the floor getting beaten by police officers. She described these friends as 'Seventeen-year old slim girls.' They were being beaten with batons by police just for trying to leave the kettle on 9 December.
To a question from Mr Dominic Raab, MP, about students deviating from the prearranged route for their march, Simon Hardy of the National Campaign against Fees and Cuts replied that 'the reactions of the students since 24 November, particularly on the demonstrations of 30 November and 9 December (were) a direct response and reaction to what the police did to us on 24 November.'
Mr Raab's follow up question suggested that student disorder at a protest subsequent to actions by the police at a previous one, sounded like students coming back for revenge; could Hardy throw light on this? Simon Hardy replied, 'It is absolutely not revenge. If anyone was carrying out any kind of revenge, it was the police on 24 November, in revenge for what happened at Millbank.' (when glass was smashed at the entrance to Conservative HQ, and some students got up on to the headquarters' roof.)
Lord Bowness (Con) asked Aaron Porter whether he thought it might be responsible to suggest that parents should not bring young children or allow them to take part in something which even he, as an organiser, thought likely to be infiltrated by people intent on trouble?
Porter replied: 'Those of school and college age feel most uncomfortable about the (tuition fees) proposals. There would equally be something irresponsible about the National Union of Students trying to prevent those people from legitimately voicing their concerns.'
And Hardy added, 'If they (the police) want to make the demonstrations more violent and increase the police repression, it is only a matter of time before we get another Ian Tomlinson or another Blair Peach on the demonstrations. The responsibility lies in what is going on in parliament to redress how people feel, how angry they are and why they are demonstrating. It is the responsibility of the police not to criminalise these demonstrations and violently attack them.'
That same day, 14 December 2010, the Assistant Commissioner of the Met, Chris Allison, appeared before the committee for examination as a witness, along with Sue Sim (Association of Chief Police Officers? lead on Public order and Public Safety.)
Asst Commissioner Allison pointed out that it was felt necessary to contain the demonstrators when protestors started to attack police lines with a view to getting through. It was thought the protestors would try to get to the LibDem headquarters in Cowley Street, and this had to be prevented. So a 'kettle' was made. Asst Commissioner Allison added that the appointed 'containment officer', a superintendent, and his staff officer, went into the kettle looking for young and vulnerable people to release. Some people were let out.
There was the intention, said Asst Commissioner Allison, to allow the crowd into Parliament Square. But when fencing was overturned so protestors could access the green, things changed. Some protestors had with them snooker balls or golf balls or paint. A fence was buckled, but then the protestors turned to the south west corner to get out via Victoria Street and the police resisted this because of the worry they would head for Millbank and get to parliament that way. Some people were being allowed out via Whitehall, but only small groups. By 9pm there were four thousand people still in the containment.
Lotd Dubs asked about communication with the crowd; was it clear to them there was an exit from the kettle via Whitehall? Asst Commissioner Allison replied that a tannoy system was used and the message was being put out that the students could leave via Whitehall in order to reach Embankment. However, 'There may have been occasions when individuals came to the cordon and said they wanted to go out and were told they couldn?t, because the area up the road was not clear.'
Lord Bowness asked, did the age of the demonstrators affect police tactics? How did officers in the cordon deal with parents asking for their children to be released?
Asst Commissioner Allison replied that police acted wherever possible when parents approached them; but it was a challenge because some 16 and 17 year olds became involved in disorder. 'Unfortunately violence and disorder doesn?t just kick in at the age of 18; for some people it kicks in a bit younger.'
Questioned by Lord Bowness about the use of charging horses, Asst Commissioner Allison described an 'active advance'.
'An active advance is a line of horses some considerable distance behind he police line. They make their way up to the police line, at a trot. The police commander shouts 'split', the police line splits and the horses go through the line. As they go through the line, they stop trotting and slow down. We only do it when the crowd have somewhere to go and the horses are not going to cause serious injury to individuals. 'The protestors, seeing the horses, didn't want to be there any more, so they moved significantly faster northwards up Whitehall.'
This was not a charge, this was an active advance, he repeated.
Section 11 of the Children Act relates to the care of young people under the age of eighteen, and Mr Sharma, MP, asked Asst. Commissioner Allison about fulfilment of the police's duty under the Act towards young protestors. Assistant Commissioner Allison said efforts were made; but the police service would 'look at every event and see if we can get it better.?'
Having run out of time, the committee Chairman said the committee would write to Asst Commissioner Allison about matters not covered or not fully covered; namely police intelligence, use of batons, treatment of disabled protesters and the covering of police numbers.
The letter which was sent, was published in the report, along with Asst Commissioner Allison's reply. Among questions asked were: Why were demonstrators contained (kettled) for up to seven hours? Were those contained told by the police about how long they were likely to be held?
Importantly, he (Asst Commissioner Allison) was also asked to comment on suggestions that mounted police, in the 9 December demonstration, approached 'at a fast pace' the demonstrators in the Parliament Square 'kettle'- and to explain why so, given that demonstrators in the kettle had nowhere to go.
The reply letter from Asst Commissioner Allison attributes the duration of seven hours' kettling of some four thousand students, schoolchildren and others in Parliament Square to 'the sustained violence that continued through Parliament Square and elsewhere up to the start of the final dispersal.'
About communication between the police and the students about how long they might be contained, Asst Commissioner Allison replied he didn't believe it was practical to give out assessments as to the likely length of time people would be held .
The reply to the query about mounted police approaching the kettled students in Parliament Square 'at a fast pace' is a long one and unclear in that Asst Commissioner Allison says mounted police 'took the decision to self-deploy' to Victoria Street to strengthen a police cordon there; the reason given being that the kettled students and schoolchildren were not to be allowed out into Victoria Street. The Bronze commander of the mounted police, wrote Asst Commissioner Allison, before directing their advance on horseback towards the students, had spotted 'a large open space' into which the students could retreat.
His letter says that two, walking pace 'passive pushes' on horseback were carried out from behind the police cordon, after which the mounted commander took his men to the front, to form what's described, without any clarification, as 'An Absolute Cordon'. This, writes, Asst. Commissioner Allison, was successful. But his letter doesn't answer the important question about this, the third, horseback advance on the students being 'at a fast pace'.
In response to the request for written clarification about the use of batons and treatment of disabled protestors, Asst Commissioner Allison wrote that he was not able to comment on the use of force by individuals on 9 December. Ultimately, officers were individually accountable for their use of force, he wrote. Officers were trained in the use of batons - every year, all officers had a minimum of twelve hours' training involving unarmed skills, handcuffing, batons and use of sprays. Officers who fail must work until they can pass; or they're removed from operational duties.
Officers, he wrote, were not prohibited from striking any part of the body - but an officer would be expected to show s/he understood the consequences of any action taken. In a crowd, a police officer might only be able to strike a head or shoulders, and might still find it reasonable to do so, knowing there could be medical consequences.
The committee Chair's letter to Asst Commissioner Allison posed the question: Was specific guidance and training available to police officers on the treatment of disabled protestors?
Asst Commissioner Allison replied in his letter that the incident to which the Chair referred (the dragging from his wheelchair and along the ground of Jody MacIntyre, who has cerebral palsy) was subject to an Independent Police Complaints Commission investigation into the action of police officers. A criminal investigation concerning the conduct of protestors was underway also. He felt unable to comment on the wheelchair incident.
The Met, he added, has as a principle of strategy, the need to respect diversity. They were supported in diversity/disability development matters by a Disability Independent Advisory Group. All the officers on duty on 9 December would have undertaken diversity training, with consideration for disability featuring as part of the training.
There were no separate tactics, he responded, that police could implement to prevent a disabled person from obstructing a police line that are different to those which could be used when dealing with able bodied people.
<span class="line-through">-</span><span class="line-through">-</span><span class="line-through">-</span>
*The upshot of the meetings and letters investigating what had gone on at the various student demonstrations last year was that the Lords' and Commons' Joint Committee on Human Rights felt it necessary to indicate in their report that both the kettling tactic and the use of batons when dealing with recent student demonstrations were carried out disproportionately.
'Facilitating Peaceful Protest' highlights the lack of clarity about the circumstances in which police can justify 'kettling', and the report decries the lack of opportunity for protestors, once trapped, to leave.
It also highlights concern about a lack of specific guidance as to the circumstances in which a baton strike to the head might be deemed justifiable. There is a human rights requirement that the use of force should be proportionate. Proportionality is defined as ' The minimum required to achieve the legitimate aim. The report stated a need for frontline officers to have operational guidance specifically on this.
Lessons learned needed to be assimilated and taken on board with all speed, it added.*