Direct Communications Unit

2 Marsham Street, London SW1P 4DF

Switchboard 020 7035 4848 Fax: 020 7035 4745 Textphone: 020 7035 4742

E-mail: [Home Office request email] Website: www.homeoffice.gov.uk

[FOI #11129 email]

Mr Mark-William Baker

Reference: T7443/9 1 June 2009

Dear Mr Baker,

Thank you for your e-mail of 29 April to the Home Office about “lawful rebellion”. Your e-mail has been forwarded to the Direct Communications Unit and I have been asked to reply.

It is not clear what you mean by “lawful rebellion”, if you mean that you wish to demonstrate regarding some deep held conviction or demonstrate your dissatisfaction with Government policy, it is a long-standing tradition in this country that people are free to gather together and to demonstrate their views provided that they do so within the law, unless they endanger public peace. Some limits are placed upon this freedom by the Public Order Act 1986, under which it is an offence to use threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Equally, people have a right to be free to carry out their lawful business without fear of intimidation and violence. There is, of course, a balance to be struck between protecting the rights of those undertaking lawful activities and the rights of demonstrators.

The role of the police in controlling demonstrations is to preserve the peace, to uphold the law and to prevent the commission of offences. Police tactics and decisions on how to achieve these objectives are a matter for the independent operational judgement of chief officers of police.

Under the Public Order Act 1986 chief officers may impose directions on assemblies and public processions to prevent serious public disorder, serious damage to property, or serious disruption to the life of the community. This would relate to the timing of the demonstration, the maximum number of people involved and the route to be taken.

The chief officer may also, under section 13 of the Act, seek the Home Secretary's consent to ban a march if he reasonably believes that the imposition of conditions will not be sufficient to prevent the march resulting in serious public disorder. In all cases, the question of whether to impose conditions or to seek a ban is for the police. The Home Secretary has no power to initiate a ban.

Violent activity cannot be regarded as a legitimate form of protest and the police and the courts have the powers they need to deal with those who engage in such activities. The Public Order Act 1986 gives the police powers to act in respect of a broad canvas of criminal offences relating to public disorder. Sections 1-5 of the Act define offences of varying degrees of seriousness ranging from riot, which is punishable by up to ten years imprisonment, down to behaviour causing or likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

In addition, the police have common law powers of arrest if they believe that a breach of the peace is about to take place, or has taken place.

The use of force by the police is governed by Section 3 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, which states that a person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders unlawfully at large.

Yours sincerely

Mr B Foley

Direct Communications Unit