Bloggerheads (UK) - Defying the parliament exclusion zone

home : best of bloggerheads : photoshopping : rupert murdoch : mps and weblogs : email
tim ireland : search engine optimisation : viral marketing : weblog marketing

Bloggerheads Archives :: welcome to the hard shell

« Jerry Springer - legal bid rejected | Main | Smells like... election victory »

June 17, 2005

Defying the parliament exclusion zone

I've been racking my brain over the best way to deal with this disgraceful state of affairs (slipped into law late last Friday afternoon), but Robin seems to have a worthwhile approach:

Perfect - They've taken away another little bit of our freedom

The Pledge: "I will apply for authorisation to demonstrate in the vicinity of Parliament every day for a month from 1st August 2005 but only if 50 other responsible citizens will too."

This is a start, but something needs to be done to shut this down before it comes into action.

Telegraph - Why I'd join the nutty protester in Parliament Square: Mr Haw may be a nuisance and a pain. But suddenly I feel the urge to join him in Parliament Square. Who is up for a mass demonstration, supporting the freedom to demonstrate?

Sorry, but a mass protest will almost certainly be spun as a justification for the legislation. Using the 'nutter' angle yourself doesn't help much, either.

Guardian - Liberty backs exclusion zone protest: Liberty, the human rights group, indicated yesterday that it would consider aiding the first protester arrested under new regulations banning unauthorised demonstrations within half a mile of parliament.

Yes, well, good luck with that. Via the Mayor of London Blog we learn of a cheeky little passage in Explanatory Memorandum (PDF):

6. European Convention on Human Rights
6.1 Not applicable.

Pfft! That pretty much sums up the Home Office's stance on just about everything these days.

Still thinking....

UPDATE: Chicken Yoghurt - Hit me baby one more time

######################### HEADS UP #############################

Public meeting Wednesday June 29th: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament"

######################### HEADS UP #############################

Posted by Manic on June 17, 2005 9:35 AM in the category The War on Stupid

Pings (Trackback)

For trackbacks, this is the URL:
http://www.bloggerheads.com/cgi-bin/mt-tbbh_20x07.pl/494

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Defying the parliament exclusion zone:

» Public meeting Wednesday June 29th: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament" from Mayor of London Blog
You do not have to agree with everything that Brian Haw is protesting about, in order to be outraged by the excessive Designated Area protest exclusion zone: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament Public meeting on 29... [Read More]

Tracked on June 17, 2005 4:00 PM

Comments

I don't get it. Who are the Home Office to decide if the European Convention on Human rights is applicable or not? Surely it's down to European Court of Human Rights to decide? otherwise what's the point of it?

Posted by: bigdaddymerk at June 17, 2005 10:51 AM

Anyone think it's odd that they say that Art 6.1 (right to a fair trial) is n/a, but that they make no mention of whether they think Art 11 (freedom of assembly) is applicable?

Posted by: D-Notice at June 17, 2005 1:06 PM

The "6.1" statement didn't apply to section 6.1 of the Human Rights Act, it was just a definition under teh "6. European Convention on Human Rights" heading.

bigdaddymerk - I agree. The problem is that under the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and also under the constitutional principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty, parliament can enact any law it wants regardless of whether or not it is compatible with the HRA. A court can declare provisions of the enacted legislation to be incompatible with the HRA, but that doesn't affect their validity.

HOWEVER, the HRA DOES say:
3. - (1) So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights.

The question is if it is possible to read this legislation in such a way. Any loopholes in it, for example? I very much doubt there would be, but it might be worth a look sometime.

Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 2:42 PM

I just looked at the penalties for offences...

Organising a demonstration in a public place in the designated area (132. (1) (a)): 51 weeks in prison, or £2500 fine

Taking part in a demonstration, or carrying out a demonstration *by yourself*: £1000 fine

This is absurd!

Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 2:58 PM

I especially love the special treat for ringleaders - almost a year in prison. Nice.

Posted by: Manic at June 17, 2005 4:09 PM

Yeah, and also the fact that you can get fined ?1000 for walking in the designated zone if any police officer decides that you're protesting...

I liked the quote that Lembit Opik raised in the debate on this, by Blair on 7 April 2002:
"When I pass protestors every day at Downing street... I may not like what they call me, but I thank God they can. That's called freedom."

(and also when Bush visited - "Protest if you will, that is your democratic right")

Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to make that public meeting, though I'd appreciate it if you'd make post of the comments on your site. Just make sure it doesn't look like you're seditiously organising protest!

Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 4:55 PM

home : best of bloggerheads : photoshopping : rupert murdoch : mps and weblogs : email tim ireland : search engine optimisation : viral marketing : weblog marketing
Bloggerheads Archives :: welcome to the hard shell
go back to front page to date archives to category archives support national service © Tim Ireland 2009 Design by Wibbler RSS \| RSD \| Atom
	« Jerry Springer - legal bid rejected \| Main \| Smells like... election victory » June 17, 2005 Defying the parliament exclusion zone I've been racking my brain over the best way to deal with this disgraceful state of affairs (slipped into law late last Friday afternoon), but Robin seems to have a worthwhile approach: Perfect - They've taken away another little bit of our freedom The Pledge: "I will apply for authorisation to demonstrate in the vicinity of Parliament every day for a month from 1st August 2005 but only if 50 other responsible citizens will too." This is a start, but something needs to be done to shut this down before it comes into action. Telegraph - Why I'd join the nutty protester in Parliament Square: Mr Haw may be a nuisance and a pain. But suddenly I feel the urge to join him in Parliament Square. Who is up for a mass demonstration, supporting the freedom to demonstrate? Sorry, but a mass protest will almost certainly be spun as a justification for the legislation. Using the 'nutter' angle yourself doesn't help much, either. Guardian - Liberty backs exclusion zone protest: Liberty, the human rights group, indicated yesterday that it would consider aiding the first protester arrested under new regulations banning unauthorised demonstrations within half a mile of parliament. Yes, well, good luck with that. Via the Mayor of London Blog we learn of a cheeky little passage in Explanatory Memorandum (PDF): 6. European Convention on Human Rights 6.1 Not applicable. Pfft! That pretty much sums up the Home Office's stance on just about everything these days. Still thinking.... UPDATE: Chicken Yoghurt - Hit me baby one more time ######################### HEADS UP ############################# Public meeting Wednesday June 29th: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament" ######################### HEADS UP ############################# Posted by Manic on June 17, 2005 9:35 AM in the category The War on Stupid Pings (Trackback) For trackbacks, this is the URL: http://www.bloggerheads.com/cgi-bin/mt-tbbh_20x07.pl/494 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Defying the parliament exclusion zone: » Public meeting Wednesday June 29th: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament" from Mayor of London Blog You do not have to agree with everything that Brian Haw is protesting about, in order to be outraged by the excessive Designated Area protest exclusion zone: "Organising Opposition to New Restrictions on Protest around Parliament Public meeting on 29... [Read More] Tracked on June 17, 2005 4:00 PM Comments I don't get it. Who are the Home Office to decide if the European Convention on Human rights is applicable or not? Surely it's down to European Court of Human Rights to decide? otherwise what's the point of it? Posted by: bigdaddymerk at June 17, 2005 10:51 AM - Anyone think it's odd that they say that Art 6.1 (right to a fair trial) is n/a, but that they make no mention of whether they think Art 11 (freedom of assembly) is applicable? Posted by: D-Notice at June 17, 2005 1:06 PM - The "6.1" statement didn't apply to section 6.1 of the Human Rights Act, it was just a definition under teh "6. European Convention on Human Rights" heading. bigdaddymerk - I agree. The problem is that under the provisions of the Human Rights Act, and also under the constitutional principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty, parliament can enact any law it wants regardless of whether or not it is compatible with the HRA. A court can declare provisions of the enacted legislation to be incompatible with the HRA, but that doesn't affect their validity. HOWEVER, the HRA DOES say: 3. - (1) So far as it is possible to do so, primary legislation and subordinate legislation must be read and given effect in a way which is compatible with the Convention rights. The question is if it is possible to read this legislation in such a way. Any loopholes in it, for example? I very much doubt there would be, but it might be worth a look sometime. Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 2:42 PM - I just looked at the penalties for offences... Organising a demonstration in a public place in the designated area (132. (1) (a)): 51 weeks in prison, or £2500 fine Taking part in a demonstration, or carrying out a demonstration by yourself: £1000 fine This is absurd! Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 2:58 PM - I especially love the special treat for ringleaders - almost a year in prison. Nice. Posted by: Manic at June 17, 2005 4:09 PM - Yeah, and also the fact that you can get fined ?1000 for walking in the designated zone if any police officer decides that you're protesting... I liked the quote that Lembit Opik raised in the debate on this, by Blair on 7 April 2002: "When I pass protestors every day at Downing street... I may not like what they call me, but I thank God they can. That's called freedom." (and also when Bush visited - "Protest if you will, that is your democratic right") Unfortunately I don't think I'll be able to make that public meeting, though I'd appreciate it if you'd make post of the comments on your site. Just make sure it doesn't look like you're seditiously organising protest! Posted by: mark at June 17, 2005 4:55 PM - Post a comment Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out) (If you're new to Bloggerheads, you may need to be approved by the moderator before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.) URL: Remember me? YesNo Comments:

Defying the parliament exclusion zone

Pings (Trackback)

Post a comment