11) Public order Flashcards
1
Q
Define breach of the peace
A
- Harm is actually done or likely to be done
- To a person, or in his presence to his property
- Or a person is in fear of being so harmed
- Through assault, affray, a riot, unlawful assembly or other distrubance
2
Q
Is breach of the peace a criminal offence?
A
No, but it generates certain police powers
3
Q
What police powers are generated by breach of the peace?
A
- Arrest
- Detention
- Having a person “bound over” to maintain good behaviour and keep the peace
- Asking participants to disperse
4
Q
What sort of situations may police use these powers?
A
- Stop or control meetings
- marches
- Demonstrations
To disperse crowds of opposing sports fans
5
Q
what is the basis for the police power of entry without a warrant to prevent a breach ofof peace?
A
Put on a statutory footing by PACE 1984
6
Q
Police’s actions and decisions at common law are subject to?
A
Subject to their obligations under s6 HRA
7
Q
What are the most contentious breach of the peace cases?
A
- Preventative actions
8
Q
Duncan v Jones
A
- Early example of the courts
- Police could use their common law powers to stop a public meeting from taking place
- Breach of the peace was likely
9
Q
Moss v MacLachlan
A
- Common law powers to stop a convoy of striking miners from picket collieries - Feared violent clashes between striking and working miners.
- Cordon on M1
- Circumstances justified preventative action - prospect of breach of the peace not too remote.
10
Q
LaPorte
Brief Facts
A
- Three anti-Iraqi coaches, on way to protest at RAF Fairfield
- Intercepted and escorted back - fear of breach of the peace
- In line with Moss - reasonable apprehension of a sufficiently imminent breach of the peace
Justified preventative action
11
Q
LaPorte
Scope of Imminent Breach
A
- Imminency required to use any common law breach of the peace power.
12
Q
LaPorte
Decision
A
- Reasonable apprehension of imminent breach of peace =** threshold requirement** before preventative action
- Preventative action = proprotionate
No indication of an imminent breach of the peace when coaches stopped. Precautions also in place at RAF base
Police actions were premature, drastic and disproportionate
Dispropotionate to restict exercise of rights under art 10 and 11 becuase some may breach the peace in the future
13
Q
Is it enough to restrict exercise of rights if someone is in company of others whom, may at some time in the future, breach the peace?
A
No
Laporte
14
Q
McClure & Moos v The CP of the Met
Principles
A
- Endorsed Laporte
- To apprehend for breach of the peace, breach must be imminent.
- Steps taken must be necessary, reasonable and proportionate
15
Q
Imminence as a concept
A
- Not inflexible
- Depends on the circumstances
16
Q
McClure & Moos v The CP of the Met
Case
A
- Two demonstrations against G20 Summit = 1mile apart
- One had violence that had been contained / dispersed
- Other was peaceful - contained to prevent hijacking by violent protesteors.
- Found was necessary, reasonable and proportionate as combo of groups would likely lead to breach of peace.
May be necessary to prevent imminent breachg of the peace, for action to be taken, affecting people who are not likely to be actively involved
17
Q
To prevent imminent breach of the peace, can action be taken affecting people who are not likely to be actively involved?
A
- Yes
- McClure
18
Q
Austin Facts
A
- Police practice of Kettling
- An anti-capitalism / globalisation demonstration
- Confined protestors for 7 hours at Oxford Circus
- Feared violence - previous demonstrations had resulted in serious disorder
19
Q
Austin
Relationship between common law and HRA
A
- Sufficiently imminent breach of the peace
- Common law to justify kettling measure in this case
- HoL found that kettling was not a disproportionate method to stop likely breach of peace.
- Restriction of movement only, as opposed to deprivation of lliberty = art 5 not engaged
- Such measures would be lawful if deployed in** good faith ** and not in an arbitrary way
- Police were found to be operating a complex situation in a difficult environment
20
Q
What does Austin exmplify
A
- In certain circumstances the police will be permitted to adopt highly restrictive measures to prevent Breach of the Peace
- Even though rights of bystanders may be affected
- Police are required to use common law public order powers in a proportionate manner
21
Q
Provocation
A
- Risk of one person unintentionally causing another to be provoked to possible violence
Redmond-Bate v DPP
22
Q
Redmond-Bate v DPP
A
- Christian Fundamentalists preaching on the steps of Wakefield Cathedral
- Initial agreement from police
- A police officer on patrol observed that a hostile crowd of 100 or more people had gathered
- Fearing BoP asked three women to stop preaching, arrested them when they didnt. Charged with obstructing a police officer
Held that police should only do this if there is reasonable apprehension that will interfere with rights and liberties of others, provoke violence which although unlawful would nto be entirely unreasonable
23
Q
What does free speech include
A
- Irritating, contentious, exxentric, heretical, the unwelcome and provocative…. providing it does not tend to provoke violence
Redmond - Bate
24
Q
What is requird for use of all breach of peace powers?
A
- Imminency
LAPORTE
25
What must police show in deployment of common law powers>
* Not arbitrary
* Deployed in good faith
* Proportionate
| **AUSTIN**
26
Case re Public Metings
Duncan v Jones
27
Case re: Kettling of a crowd
Austin v MPC
28
Case re: Industrial picketing
Moss v Mclachlan
29
Case re: Definition of breach of the peace
R v Howell
30
Case re: Travel to demonstration
R(Laporte) v CC Glos
31
s 11 POA 1986
Advance notice public processions
32
s 12 POA 1986
Conditions on processions
33
s 13 POA 1986
Prohibition of processions
34
s 14 POA 1986
Conditions on public assemblies
35
s 14A POA 1986
Trespassory Assembleis - prohibitions and offences
36
When police exercise public order powers, as a public authority, what must they make sure?
* That they exercise powers in a way that complies with their obligation
* As a public authority
* Under s 6 of the HRA
37
What articles would be engaged if the police take a decision to ban a protest march
* Article 10 - disproportionate interference with rights of demonstrators **freedom of expression**
* Article 11 - Freedom of assembly and association
* Article 5 - right to liberty
38
Residual freedom
* Citizens of UK law
* Free to do or say what they wish
* Unless prohibited by law
39
State interference with person's qualified rights under art 10 and 11, must be....
* Prescribed by law
* In pursuit of a ligitimate aim
* Necessary in a democratic society = proportionate
40
What is a public procession
* In a public place (POA s16)
* Procession must be moving - not a body of persons - must be moving along a route, and the "organiser" seen to be directing the route **Flockhart v Robinson**
41
What does section 11(1) POA require
* Written notice to be given of any proposal to hold a public procession
a) To demonstrate support for or opposition to the views or actions of persons
b) To publicise a cause or campaign
c) To mark or commemorate an event.... unless it it not reasonably practicable to give any advance notice of the procession
42
s11(1) - Advance notice
* Organisers myst give a minimum of **six clear days notice**
* Of the date, time and route of procession.
**Failure to do so amounts to an offence under s11(7)**
43
Why do organisers have to give advance notice?
* Rationale is to allow the police to consider public order issues in advance of the event
* And give directions to prevent pyblic order.
44
Which processions are exempt from the need to give advance notice?
* Where the procession is **commonly or customarily held** in the police area which it is proposed
* A **funeral procession** organised by a funeral director acting in the normal course of business**S11(2)**
**S11(2)**
| Kay v CPM
45
Kay v CPM
* HoL held that Critical Mass = monthly mass cycle rides
* Occuring since 1994
= commonly or customarily held procession
* Despite the fact routes varied and nature of events was spontaneous
46
When can police powers be used to impose conditions on processions
**s12(1) POA**
* Senior police officer **reasonably believes**
* May result in **serious public disorder**, serious **damage to property**, or serious **disruption to the life of the community**
47
When may the noise of a procession warrant conditions being imposed
* If causes serious disruption to organisation in the vicinity.
* Purpose is the **intimidation of others with a view to compelling them**
| **s12(1) POA**
48
Examples of when 12(1) is engaged
* Delay to the delivery of a time-sensitive product to consumers
Noise generaed by the procession
49
Describe the powers granted to senior police officers under Section 12 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022.
Senior police officers are empowered to impose conditions **as appear necessary**on individuals organizing or participating in public processions to **prevent risks such as disorder, damage, or intimidation.**
50
Explain the significance of case law in relation to Section 12 of the POA.
**Police v Reid** the court clarified that **intimidatory behavio**r must be of a degree intended to compel others against their will.
**R (Brehony) v Chief Constable** emphasized the necessity for police to provide **sufficient reasons** for imposing conditions. **Procedural obligation.**
51
Define the offences and defences outlined in Section 12 of the POA.
**Organiser**
* Fails to comply with condition
* Knew or ought to know of condition
* Defence = failure arose from circumstances beyond his control
**Participant**
* Fails to comply with condition
* Knew or ought to know of condition
* Defence = failure arose from circumstances beyond his control
**A person who incites another to commit an offence**
* guiltuy of the offence
52
How are sanctions determined under Section 12 of the POA for non-compliance?
Sanctions for non-compliance with Section 12 conditions vary based on the nature of the offence.
8) Organizers found guilty face potential imprisonment for up to 51 weeks and/ or fines up to level 4 on the standard scale.
9) Participants may incur fines of the same level
10) those inciting others to commit offences face potential imprisonment for up to 51 weeks and /or fines up to level 4 on the standard scale.
53
Discuss the role of the chief police officer under Section 13 of the POA.
Under Section 13(1), the chief police officer can apply for a prohibition order from the local authority if ...
they **reasonably believe** because of **particular circumstances** that existing powers under Section 12 are **insufficient** to prevent **serious public disorder**.
Alllowing for temporary bans on processions in specific areas for** up to three months**, contingent upon** Home Secretary approval.** (s13(3)
Local authority can request modifications
54
Explain the conditions under which a prohibition order can be applied for according to Section 13.
A prohibition order can be applied for by the chief police officer when there is a **reasonable belief **that** specific circumstances **in a district may lead to serious public disorder if processions are allowed, and the **powers under s12 are not sufficient to prevent serious public disorder**. T
55
Describe the implications of failing to comply with conditions imposed under Section 12.
Failing to comply with conditions set under Section 12 can lead to criminal charges for both organizers and participants of a public procession. Organizers may face imprisonment or fines, while participants could incur fines.
56
How does Section 12(3) ensure clarity in the imposition of conditions for processions?
Section 12(3) mandates that any conditions imposed on a public procession must be **documented in writing prior to the event**. This requirement ensures that all parties are fully aware of the expectations and legal obligations, reducing ambiguity and potential disputes.
Written conditions serve as a formal record, providing clarity and accountability for both law enforcement and procession organizers.
57
Explain the relationship between intimidatory behavior and the organizers' intent under Section 12.
Under **Section 12(1)(b), intimidatory behavior** must be of a nature that the organizers had a **view to compel others** to act against their will.
58
Discuss the procedural obligations of senior police officers when imposing conditions on processions.
Senior police officers are required to provide **sufficient justification** to the organizers when imposing conditions on a procession. Thi**s procedural obligation**, derived from** case law**, ensures transparency and fairness in law enforcement actions.
59
Describe the potential consequences for **inciting** others to commit offences under Section 12.
Inciting another person to commit an offence under Section 12 is treated seriously, with penalties including imprisonment for up to 51 weeks and/ or fines up to level 4 on the standard scale.
60
Explain the importance of the Home Secretary's consent in the prohibition order process.
The requirement for the Home Secretary's consent =**s 13(2)**
61
Discuss the implications of the time-sensitive product delivery clause for Section 12.
The inclusion of a clause in **Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022** regarding delays to the delivery of time-sensitive products in Section 12 reflects the law's recognition of the economic impact of public processions.
62
Describe the scope of Section 12(1) in relation to public processions.
Section 12(1) outlines the scope of police authority concerning public processions, allowing **senior officers** to impose conditions as a**pppear necessary to prevent disorder, damage, or intimidation.**
63
xplain the significance of written conditions as stipulated in Section 12(3).
64
Describe the role of local authorities in issuing prohibition orders under the Public Order Act (POA).
Local authorities have a limited role in issuing prohibition orders under the Public Order Act.
* They can make an order as requested by the police
* Or with modifications approved by the Home Secretary.
However, they cannot initiate a prohibition on their own.
65
Explain the process for prohibiting processions in London according to the POA.
In London, the process for prohibiting processions differs from other areas as local authority applications are not required.
S13(1) does not apply.
Instead, the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis or the City of London can issue a prohibition order if they **reasonably** believe that existing measures under section 12 are insufficient to prevent serious public disorder.
66
Define the judicial review process in relation to prohibition orders.
Judicial review allows individuals or groups to challenge the legality of prohibition orders issued under the Public Order Act.
* **Kent v Metropolitan Police Commissioner** where the applicant contested a** broad ban on all processions**.
* 28 day ban over entire met police district
* NF and Anti-Nazi demonstrations
**The court upheld the police's decision, emphasizing the importance of operational discretion in matters of public safety and security.**
67
How did the August 2011 riots influence the use of prohibition orders in London?
Following the August 2011 riots, the then Home Secretary Theresa May approved a ** prohibition order banning all public processions in five London boroughs for thirty days**.
This decision aimed to prevent a planned march by the English Defence League, reflecting a proactive approach to public safety. The order's broad geographical scope drew criticism for being larger thatn the proposed route march.
**S13 is blunt = sparingly applied**
68
Explain the significance of the case Kent v Metropolitan Police Commissioner in the context of prohibition orders.
The case of Kent v Metropolitan Police Commissioner is significant as it illustrates the judiciary's reluctance to interfere with police operational decisions regarding public safety.
The court upheld a broad prohibition order despite challenges regarding its scope.
69
Describe the concept of a 'public assembly' as defined by the POA.
Under **s 16 Public Order Act,** a 'public assembly' is defined as a gathering of two or more individuals in a public space that is either wholly or partially open to the air.
This definition was refined by the** Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003**, which reduced the minimum number of participants from 20 to 2.
70
What changes did the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 introduce regarding protests?
The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 introduced the concept of **a 'one-person protest**' under the Public Order Act.
* Police Powers can be exercised over individuals (largely noise)
71
Differences between applying s14 (public assemblies) to s11(1) public processions
* The purpose of the assembly is irrelevant
* No obligation to give advance notice to the police
72
Explain the rationale behind the broad application of prohibition orders.
Prohibition orders under the Public Order Act are applied s**paringly due to their blunt nature,** which can restrict civil liberties. The rationale for their use is primarily to prevent serious public disorder, especially in situations where there is a credible risk of violence or unrest.
However, the broad application can lead to criticism regarding the infringement of rights, necessitating careful consideration and justification by authorities before implementation.** eg Theresa May 2011**
73
Describe the role of the Commissioner of Police in issuing prohibition orders** in London.**
In London, the Commissioner of Police plays a pivotal role in issuing prohibition orders under section 13 of the Public Order Act. Unlike other areas where local authorities are involved, the Commissioner can act independently if they believe that existing measures are inadequate to prevent serious public disorder. This authority allows for rapid responses to emerging threats, reflecting the unique challenges of policing in a densely populated urban environment.
74
What are the potential criticisms of prohibition orders based on their application?
Prohibition orders can face criticism for their potential to infringe on civil liberties, particularly the right to protest. Critics argue that such orders may be applied too broadly, as seen in cases like the August 2011 riots, where the geographical scope of the ban exceeded the immediate threat. This raises concerns about the balance between maintaining public order and protecting democratic freedoms, prompting calls for more nuanced approaches to regulation.
75
Explain the significance of the term 'modifications' in the context of local authority orders.
The term 'modifications' in the context of local authority orders under the Public Order Act signifies that while local authorities can issue prohibition orders, they must do so in alignment with police requests and with the Home Secretary's approval.
This allows for adjustments to the original terms proposed by the police, ensuring that the final order is tailored to address specific public safety concerns while still adhering to legal standards and oversight.
76
Describe the circumstances under which police powers of control can be exercised **according to section 14ZA.**
Section 14ZA outlines specific circumstances where police **can exercise control over individuals**, primarily focused on **managing noise disruption**
77
Explain the differences between section 14 and section 11(1) of the Public Order Act regarding public assemblies.
The key differences between section 14 and section 11(1) of the Public Order Act (POA) include
* the irrelevance of the assembly's purpose under section 14 and
* the absence of a requirement to notify police in advance.
This means that individuals can gather without prior notice, and the police cannot consider the intent behind the assembly when determining their response, **allowing for greater freedom of assembly.**
78
How did the case of **R (Jones) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis** impact the interpretation of public assemblies under section 14?
In the case of R (Jones) v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, the court ruled that a series of **disruptive activities by Extinction Rebellion**, taking place over 12 dayss at multiple sites **did not qualify as an 'assembly' under section 14 of the POA**
This decision clarified that the police lacked the authority to disperse gatherings linked to these activities.
79
Define the conditions under which police can impose restrictions on public assemblies as per section 14(1) of the POA.
Section 14(1) of the Public Order Act allows police to impose conditions on public assemblies if a senior officer **reasonably believes** that the assembly may lead to serious** public disorder, property damage**, or significant **disruption to community life.**
Additionally, if the **noise** from the assembly could disrupt nearby organizations or **intimidate** individuals, police can also impose restrictions to mitigate these risks, ensuring public safety.
80
Explain the role of the senior police officer in imposing conditions on assemblies under section 14.
Under section 14 of the Public Order Act, the **most senior police officer present at an assembly** is empowered to impose conditions if they believe it is necessary to prevent disorder or disruption.
**Confirmed in Jones**
81
Explain the limitations of police powers under section 14 compared to section 13 regarding public assemblies.
While section 14 allows police to impose conditions on public assemblies, it does not grant them the authority to issue prohibition orders, which is a power reserved for section 13 concerning processions. This means that **while police can regulate the conduct of assemblies through conditions, they cannot outright ban them**. This distinction highlights the balance between maintaining public order and respecting the right to assemble.
82
Describe the necessity requirement in section 14 of the POA and its significance.
The necessity requirement in section 14 of the Public Order Act mandates that police powers to impose conditions on assemblies **must be exercised in a proportionate manner.**
83
Explain how police powers under section 14 must align with their duties under section 6 of the Human Rights Act.
Police powers under section 14 of the Public Order Act must be exercised in accordance with their obligations under section 6 of the Human Rights Act, which requires public authorities to act in a manner compatible with the rights protected by the Act.
This alignment ensures that while police manage public assemblies, they also respect individuals' rights to freedom of assembly and expression, balancing law enforcement with human rights considerations.
84
Describe the potential consequences of imposing conditions on public assemblies under section 14.
Imposing conditions on public assemblies under section 14 can lead to various consequences, including limiting the duration of the assembly, capping attendance, or restricting the use of sound amplification. While these measures aim to prevent disorder and protect public safety, they can also impact the effectiveness of protests and the ability of individuals to express their views. The challenge lies in ensuring that such conditions are justified and do not infringe on fundamental rights.
85
Describe the implications of the 'intimidation' clause in section 14(1)(b) of the POA.
The 'intimidation' clause in section 14(1)(b) of the Public Order Act allows police to impose conditions on assemblies if the organizers aim to intimidate others to compel or prevent actions they have a right to take.
**Intiidatory behaviour must be sufficient to compel** the target not to do something.
**Police v Reid (Lorna)** - Anti apartheid demonstraition - shouted **"Aprtheid murderers, get out of Britain"**. Needed to compel guests not to go into South Africa House, not to produce discomfort
86
Explain the significance of the case Police v Reid in understanding intimidation during protests.
The case of Police v Reid illustrates the legal interpretation of intimidation in the context of protests. The court clarified that intimidation must involve an intent to compel individuals not to act, rather than merely causing discomfort. This distinction is crucial for law enforcement and protestors alike, as it sets a higher threshold for what constitutes intimidation, thereby protecting the right to free expression during demonstrations.
87
How does the case R (Brehony) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police inform the application of Section 14?
R (Brehony) v Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police highlights the procedural and substantive aspects of Section 14 controls on assemblies.
* Claimant had held regular demonstrations outside M&S for four years
* Temporary conditions of Christmas to move demonstration to Peace Gardens.
* Claimant challenged that **did not have reasonable belief** under s14(1) , and not proportionate.
* The court ruled that the Chief Constable's belief in potential disruption was sufficient for imposing conditions on protests, not unreasonable.
* **Also proportionate as only a temporary and limited restriction on rights to achieve a legitimate aim**
88
DPP v James
* Assessment of "reasonable belief" and risks or dangers.
* Protest outside of Royal Courts of Justice, disrupting traffic on the Strand
* Causing serious disruption to life of community.
* Issued a condition **under 14(1)** imposing a condition to move away from road to pavement.
* James convicted for knowingly failing to comply
**TEST**: Reasonable ground for belief. Conditions imposed prevent disruption = proportionality.
| Moved away from irrationality approach in Brehony.
89
What type of reasonable belief did DPP v James require?
An honest subjective belief and objective grounds, sufficiently capable of inducing that belief in a reasonable person
90
How did the court assess the proportionality of conditions imposed in R (Brehony) v Chief Constable?
In R (Brehony) v Chief Constable, the court assessed the proportionality of imposed conditions by examining whether they represented a** temporary and limited restriction on rights**. The conditions were deemed appropriate as they aimed to prevent serious disruption during a busy shopping period.
91
Discuss the importance of case law in shaping the understanding of Section 14.
Case law plays a crucial role in interpreting Section 14, providing judicial guidance on how the law should be applied in practice. Decisions like **Police v Reid **and **R (Brehony) v Chief Constable** clarify the standards for reasonable belief and the definition of intimidation,.
92
Explain the significance of reasonable belief in the context of police directions following DPP v James
If an officer holds a belief based on reasonable grounds, then conditions they impose are deemed necessary to avert potential disruption. This belief serves as proof of proportionality, negating the need for a separate assessment.
The court's shift from irrationality to a reasonable belief standard emphasizes both subjective honesty and objective grounds, ensuring that police actions are justified and transparent.
| DPP v James
93
Describe the procedural requirements for police when imposing conditions on demonstrations as established in Brehony.
* In the Brehony case, the court addressed whether the Chief Constable was required to provide reasons for imposing conditions under section 14(1) of the Public Order Act.
* Since conditions were set in advance, the Chief Constable had to identify three potential consequences of the demonstration he reasonably believed could occur.
* Extensive detail was not mandated, sufficient information was necessary for demonstrators to understand the rationale behind the imposed directions, ensuring transparency and accountability in police actions.
94
Discuss the implications of the police's use of public health regulations to prohibit assemblies, as seen in the Sarah Everard vigil case.
The police's decision to prohibit the vigil for Sarah Everard, citing public health regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic, highlights the intersection of public safety and assembly rights. This action raised significant concerns about the balance between protecting public health and upholding the right to protest. The subsequent public order situation, marked by arrests of attendees, underscores the complexities and potential conflicts that arise when legal powers are invoked to restrict gatherings, especially in sensitive contexts involving social justice.
95
Define a 'trespassory assembly' under section 14A of the Public Order Act 1986.
A 'trespassory assembly' is defined under section 14A of the Public Order Act 1986 as a gathering o**f 20 or more individuals** at a place or land where the public has **no right of access or only limited access.**
* Land defined as "land in open air" - must be **wholly in the open air**
96
Difference in meaning of location between s14 (public assembly) and s14A (trespassory assembly)?
* Land in Trespassory Assembly means **wholly in the open air**
* Land in Public assemblies = public places that are **wholly or partly open to the air**
97
Explain the process by which police can prohibit a trespassory assembly according to section 14A.
Under section 14A, a **chief police officer** can seek a **prohibition order from the local authority** if they **reasonably believe a trespassory assembly is planned**.
* The assembly must either lack the occupier's permission or exceed any granted permissions.
* Additionally, the officer must believe that the assembly could lead to serious community disruption
* or significant damage to important land or structures.
98
Describe the changes made to the Public Order Act 1986 by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994.
The Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 amended the Public Order Act 1986 by introducing section 14A, which grants police the authority to prohibit 'trespassory assemblies.' This addition allows law enforcement to take action against gatherings that occur on land where the public has no right of access, thereby expanding the legal framework governing public assemblies..
99
Explain the significance of the court's emphasis on reasonable belief assessment in the James case.
In the James case, the court shifted focus from an irrationality approach to a reasonable belief assessment, emphasizing the need for **both subjective honesty and objective grounds**. This change signifies a more nuanced understanding of police discretion, requiring that officers not only believe in the necessity of their actions but also have reasonable justifications that would convince a rational observer.
100
Discuss the implications of the court's ruling on the necessity of providing reasons for police conditions in Brehony.
The court's ruling in Brehony established that police must provide reasons for imposing conditions on demonstrations, particularly when these conditions are set in advance.
While the court acknowledged that extensive detail is not necessary, the obligation to provide sufficient information ensures that the rights of individuals to protest are respected and that police powers are exercised responsibly.
101
Describe the criteria for a gathering to be classified as a trespassory assembly under section 14A.
For a gathering to be classified as a trespassory assembly under section 14A, it must consist of 20 or more individuals and occur on land where the public has no right of access or only limited access. The assembly must also be held without the permission of the land's occupier or exceed any permissions granted. This classification allows police to take action against unauthorized gatherings that could disrupt community life or damage significant sites, thereby protecting public order.
102
Describe the offences outlined in Section 14B of the Public Order Act (POA).
Section 14B of the Public Order Act (POA) identifies various offences related to the organization and participation in trespassory assemblies. This **includes individuals who incite** others to join such assemblies. `
| DPP v Margaret Jones
103
Explain the significance of the case DPP v Jones (Margaret) in relation to trespassory assemblies.
The case DPP v Jones (Margaret) is significant as it clarified the definition of 'trespassory' assemblies under Section 14B of the POA. The House of Lords overturned convictions of protestors who demonstrated peacefully on a public highway near Stonehenge, emphasizing that such activities, if non-obstructive and not causing nuisance, do not constitute trespass.
**Highways = a public place**
This ruling reinforced the right to peaceful assembly in public spaces, provided it adheres to certain conditions.
104
Describe the conditions under which a peaceful assembly can be held on a public highway according to the law.
A peaceful assembly can be held on a public highway **as long as it does not cause public or private nuisance and does not obstruct the highway**.
The law, as clarified in DPP v Jones, recognizes the public highway as a space for reasonable activities, including demonstrations, provided they are** conducted peacefully and do not interfere with the rights of others**. This legal framework supports the right to assembly while ensuring public order is maintained.
105
Explain the responsibilities of organizers of public processions under the POA.
Organizers of public processions under the Public Order Act (POA) have specific responsibilities, primarily the requirement to notify the police in advance of the event as stipulated in Section 11. This notification allows police to prepare for the procession, ensuring public safety and order. Organizers must also comply with any conditions imposed by the police, which may include restrictions on the route, timing, and conduct of participants to prevent disruption.
106
Describe the legal consequences for individuals inciting participation in trespassory assemblies.
Individuals who incite others to participate in trespassory assemblies can face legal consequences under Section 14B of the Public Order Act. This provision holds accountable not only those who organize or take part in such assemblies but also those who encourage or incite participation. The law aims to deter disruptive behavior and maintain public order by imposing sanctions on individuals who contribute to unlawful gatherings.
107
How does the POA define a 'trespassory assembly'?
A 'trespassory assembly' is defined under the Public Order Act (POA) as a gathering that occurs in a manner that violates the law, particularly in relation to public spaces. The definition has been shaped by case law, notably DPP v Jones, which clarified that assemblies must not obstruct public highways or cause nuisance. The law recognizes the right to peaceful assembly, provided it does not infringe on public order or safety.
108
Explain the significance of advance notice for public processions under the POA.
Advance notice for public processions, as mandated by Section 11 of the Public Order Act (POA), is significant as it allows police to prepare for the event, ensuring public safety and order. This requirement helps authorities manage potential disruptions and coordinate resources effectively. By informing the police in advance, organizers contribute to a more organized and peaceful demonstration, balancing the right to protest with the need for community safety.
109
s12(3)
The conditions must be **documented in writing** if imposed prior to the event, ensuring clarity and legal compliance for all parties involved.
110
S13 inside and outside of London
* In London Chief Police Officer can make a prohibition of public procession
* Outside London, police have to apply to LA to prohibit processions
111
Imposition of conditions on a public assembly
**Statute Ref**
s 14(1)
112
Prohibition of a public procession in London
**Statute Ref**
s13(4)
113
Prohibition of a trespassory assembly
**Statute Ref**
s14A
114
Imposition of conditions ona procession
**Statute Ref**
s12(1)
115
Requirement to give notice of a public procession
**Statute Ref**
s 11(1)
116
