A law unto themselves: on the relatively autonomous operation of protest policing during the COVID-19 pandemic (original) (raw)
Related papers
Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 2021
The policing of peaceful public assembly during the Covid-19 pandemic has been one of the most central challenges to police legitimacy. This is arguably because mass gatherings are assumed to carry a high risk of contagion yet, at the same time, peaceful public assembly is a protected human right. In this article, we explore this issue by using a case study to provide a detailed chronological interactional analysis of the policing operation surrounding a highly controversial public assembly that took place on Clapham Common in March 2021 in London, England. We explore the utility of a research and theory-based model for public order policing in pandemics as a framework for understanding the way the event evolved and identifying what lessons can be learnt for policing assemblies, both in future pandemics and more generally. We contend that ambiguity in the application of emergency powers and the potential for heavy fines to be applied using the legislation created a divergence between stakeholders and culminated in a leadership vacuum among protesters. Moreover, the context of acute political sensitivity led to a highly centralized public order operation that limited the capacity of police to enact dialogue-based solutions when leadership (re)emerged during the event. We conclude by discussing the implications of our analysis for understanding the inherent dangers of regulatory frameworks that place too heavy a burden of discretionary power into the hands of police in determining whether public assemblies are 'lawful', and under what conditions they can occur.
Policing the G20 protests: ‘Too much order with too little law’ revisited
Queensland Review, 2015
In the months leading up to November's G20 summit in 2014, Brisbane's residents would have been forgiven for anticipating the outbreak of a local civil war. Media outlets were leading with headlines stating, among other sensational claims, that ‘G20 anarchists vow chaos and mayhem for Brisbane's streets’, ‘Black Bloc tactics aim for Brisbane G20 shock and awe’ and ‘Destructive protest plan for G20’. Meanwhile, some of the most severe restrictions on civil liberties seen in Australia in recent years were legislated by the Queensland parliament. The G20 Safety and Security Act 2013 (Qld) (the G20 Act) was passed with little demur by a chamber that was only divided over the question of whether the laws were severe enough, with Queensland opposition police spokesman Bill Byrne MP declaring himself ‘surprised’ at the leniency of some of the sentencing provisions and the ‘minimalist’ approach to restricted areas. Of course, in the event the much-anticipated violence did not oc...
Policing protest, security and freedom: the 2014 G20 experience
Police Practice and Research, 2017
This article examines the policing of a major international political event (the G20 Meetings in Brisbane, Australia in 2014) from the perspective of the police and representatives of demonstrator groups who participated in the event. The article locates the policing of the 2014 G20 meetings within the history of the policing of major international political meetings in other countries. It analyses the legal framework within which the policing of the Brisbane G20 meeting was undertaken, comparing and contrasting these with legal frameworks developed for similar meetings and associated demonstrations in other jurisdictions. In the case of the Australian G20 Act, the legislation prioritized security over human rights, including the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. The strategies and planning processes applied by police in the lead up to the G20 are discussed, including the efforts made to ensure policing responses were respectful of the democratic rights of protesters. Drawing on interview and other data, the article reveals a diversity of perspectives on the 'human rights' policing and dialogue models, and provides an assessment of 'Operation Southern Cross' based on the post-event review of the G20 legislation undertaken by the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission. The authors conclude that the policing of G20, based on extensive dialogue and minimization of coercive public order strategies, fostered a peaceful G20 event. The article concludes with observations about the perceived success of G20 policing in Australia, and indicates some lessons learned for best practice policing for future global events. The subject of public order in a free, permissive, and participatory society requires that great allowance should be made for freedom of speech, expression and of protest generally. The police should not be used to put down freedom of expression or protest, but merely to facilitate it within the law.
Climate Action in a Globalizing World, edited by C. Cassegård, L. Soneryd, H. Thörn and Å. Wettergren. New York: Routledge., 2017
In Chapter 3, Governing dissent in a state of emergency: police and protester interactions in the global space of the COP, Mattias Wahlström and Joost de Moor analyze how the French authorities governed climate protest in Paris during COP21, and how this impacted on the form and content of the major protest actions. Only two weeks prior to COP21, the French authorities had imposed a state of emergency as a reaction to the terrorist attacks in Paris on November 13, 2015. The emergency legislation granted the state the power to ban all public protest and expanded the capacities of the police. While authorities enforced the protest ban, it did so in an unpredictable manner, banning some protest events while allowing others to take place. This situation, and especially the uncertainty it created, strongly influenced how the mobilization of the climate movement unfolded. The authors argue that the overall aim of maintaining security during COP21 spilled over into significant repression of dissent and escalation of conflict in the public spaces of Paris – especially during the first days of action. Protest organizers experienced a high degree of uncertainty and fear of repression. This led to internal struggles within the movement when plans had to be adjusted, but also to a reframing of the protests in various ways, merging the climate change issue with demands for peace and civil liberties.
Policing Political Protest: Paradoxes of the Age of Austerity
Social Text: Periscope, 2012
We received notice from the owners of Zuccotti Park," went the incantatory call on the People's Mic in the predawn darkness of October 14, 2011. We-we thousandsrepeated the phrase in unison, without hesitation. "That they are postponing their cleaning." Few repeated that phrase. Instead, we shouted and screamed, whooped and whistled, clapped and hugged. It remains unclear why the initial threat to evict Occupy Wall Street (OWS), in the name of cleaning the site, did not occur. Whatever the explanation, as we rallied and learned that no eviction would occur, it felt like anything-winning, even-was possible. Within a month, however, the outlines of how the movement's destruction would occur began to take shape. Internal squabbles and disorganization would play some role. But the chief cause would be brutal repression by militarized police forces across the United States.
Police Practice and Research Policing protest, security and freedom: the 2014 G20 experience
This article examines the policing of a major international political event (the G20 Meetings in Brisbane, Australia in 2014) from the perspective of the police and representatives of demonstrator groups who participated in the event. The article locates the policing of the 2014 G20 meetings within the history of the policing of major international political meetings in other countries. It analyses the legal framework within which the policing of the Brisbane G20 meeting was undertaken, comparing and contrasting these with legal frameworks developed for similar meetings and associated demonstrations in other jurisdictions. In the case of the Australian G20 Act, the legislation prioritized security over human rights, including the freedoms of expression and peaceful assembly. The strategies and planning processes applied by police in the lead up to the G20 are discussed, including the efforts made to ensure policing responses were respectful of the democratic rights of protesters. Drawing on interview and other data, the article reveals a diversity of perspectives on the 'human rights' policing and dialogue models, and provides an assessment of 'Operation Southern Cross' based on the post-event review of the G20 legislation undertaken by the Queensland Crime and Corruption Commission. The authors conclude that the policing of G20, based on extensive dialogue and minimization of coercive public order strategies, fostered a peaceful G20 event. The article concludes with observations about the perceived success of G20 policing in Australia, and indicates some lessons learned for best practice policing for future global events.
This chapter explores the sensitive topic of police violence at political protests in Ireland in more recent times and in particular the question of when and how it is legitimised. Long experience of discussing the matter with students, colleagues, journalists and members of the public makes it clear that many people see police acts using force as per se legitimate and therefore not ‘violent’, a term thus reserved for illegitimate acts. Yet police behaviour can be contested publicly and on occasion found to be illegitimate (by expert opinion, by media commentators, by internal inquiries or indeed by courts of law). The question of how the use of force is legitimised – and what conditions make this achievement of legitimacy more or less likely – is then an interesting one, as is the broader question of why a police decision is made to use force in the first place, and at what level.