Connect with us

Published

on

“The right to freedom of expression and assembly are fundamental aspects of a liberal democratic society.” The House of Commons Library briefing for MPs, issued this August, could not be clearer.

The home secretary began her controversial Times article last week by declaring “peaceful marches are never banned and even controversial and disruptive ones are policed rather than blocked”.

Yet both the prime minister and home secretary expressed the opinion that this weekend’s pro-Palestinian march should not take place, contrary to the decision by the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley not to seek a ban from the home secretary.

Politics latest: Senior minister issues warning as Sunak considers whether to sack Braverman

Rishi Sunak warned ominously “it is my job to hold him accountable”.

Suella Braverman went further, accusing the Met of “double standards” and the perception that they “play favourites when it comes to protesters”. She repeated her view that the pro-Palestinians are “hate marchers”.

The prime minister’s office equivocated that Downing Street had seen her article in advance without approving it and that Mr Sunak still had full confidence in his home secretary.

More on Israel-hamas War

If one aim of the Hamas terror attack on 7 October was to spread confusion and panic among Israel and its allies they have certainly succeeded in the UK, setting the prime minister, the home secretary and the nation’s chief of police at odds.

An accident of the calendar added to the tension. This year Remembrance Day, 11 November, the traditional date to commemorate those who died defending their country in war, happened to fall on a Saturday, the traditional non-working day for major protest marches in the capital.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Thousands gather for pro-Palestinian march

Ms Braverman seemed anxious to foment this apparent clash of cultural attitudes, however unwilling the organisations involved with the two events were to be drawn in.

Both the Royal British Legion and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign argued that both their plans should go ahead and that they should not disrupt each other. Jewish representatives were clear that they did not want the Palestinian march banned on their account.

The pro-Palestinians chose to set aside Sir Mark’s earlier request to “urgently reconsider” a protest on 11 November as “not appropriate”.

Read more:
Analysis: It’s a question of when – not if – Braverman leaves her job

Braverman ‘at sea and ignorant’, Sinn Fein’s president warns
Home secretary’s long list of controversies

10 out of 12 marches not permitted were planned by right-wing groups

Meanwhile other events went ahead on Saturday, including the Lord Mayor’s Show, which shuts down roads in the City of London for a 24-hour period.

The usual Remembrance Sunday Service at the Cenotaph, attended by the Monarch and political leaders, is due to go ahead with no scheduled conflict with other protests. The Met usually permits, and monitors, a Remembrance march by the English Defence League.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Brits divided over Gaza march

Statistics are not published on marches which are denied permission. The last known ban was on the EDL in 2011. Ten out of 12 of those not permitted under the Public Order Act were planned by right-wing organisations.

This seems to be of concern to Ms Braverman, who complains that “pro-Palestinian mobs” and Black Lives Matter have not met with the same “stern response” as “right-wing and nationalist protesters”.

Conversely she is unhappy with the “tough” treatment of “lockdown objectors” and “football fans”.

Job of controlling crowds used to fall to military

The point of public protests is to register dissent from positions taken by those in authority, often governments, and to support sides in issues over which there is controversy.

Not surprisingly, this has often brought protesters into confrontation with governments and sometimes into conflict with the forces they task with maintaining order.

Before the establishment of civilian police forces, the job of controlling crowds usually fell to the military, sometimes with violent consequences.

In 1819, 18 people were killed and over 400 injured when cavalry charged protesters for civil rights at Peterloo in Manchester. In 1834 in Newport, around 20 people were killed and 50 wounded in a firefight between soldiers in the 45th Regiment of Foot and armed Chartists, demanding political reform.

Subsequently the principle was established that the primary role of the police force is to protect the right of free speech, including protest, provided that those taking part were not breaking the law in some other aspect.

This could prove highly controversial.

In 1936 the Metropolitan Police were mobilised to protect a march by the British Union of Fascists, Sir Oswald Mosley’s “Black Shirts”, through the East End of London, including areas with a significant Jewish population.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why are people marching in London?

Local people, of all backgrounds, gathered in far greater numbers for a counter-demonstration. Clashes between police and rival demonstrators followed, with over 150 arrests, most famously when the police attempted to remove a barricade which had been placed across Cable Street.

The Public Order Act 1936, which followed “the Battle of Cable Street”, established some key restrictions on future protests in the UK. It outlawed the wearing of political uniforms and it forced organisers of large meetings and demonstrations to obtain police permission.

Crucially the police gained powers independently to impose conditions relating to the duration and route of marches. Mosley wanted to march in the East End as a deliberate provocation to the communities there.

Right to protest is protected in UK

This weekend the possibility of a clash was significantly reduced when the official Palestinian march adopted a route different from previous Saturdays and away from the Cenotaph, the official national remembrance monument, and Parliament Square.

A special “controlled area” around parliament was introduced in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. By then a previous convention banning demonstrations in the area had been abandoned and permanent encampments had been set up by a number of protest movements including Anti-Pinochet, the Countryside Alliance and Stop the War. The new act banned the use of loudspeakers and pitching of tents.

In the UK the right to protest is protected by Article 10 and Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and given effect in the UK through the Human Rights Act (HRA) 1998, another bete noir of the home secretary. There are no legal powers to ban people gathering for so-called “static” demonstrations.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM ‘politicking’ over pro-Palestine march

Intelligence did not support ‘reasonable belief’ serious disorder was likely

Protest marches can only be banned by the home secretary on application from the local police chief or police and crime commissioner. The central government has reserved this power for itself rather than devolve it to the mayor of London, even though the mayor is in charge of police in the capital.

Under Section 12 of the Public Order Act 1986, the commissioner can place restrictions on marches if he or she “reasonably believes” there could be serious disorder, damage or disruption.

But Sir Mark refused to go further and apply for a ban under Section 13 because his intelligence did not support the “reasonable belief” that serious disorder was likely on Saturday.

Police resources stretched thin

In the wake of the Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil protests the government tightened the law on protests with the Public Order Act 2023.

But measures against “serious public disorder”, “serious damage to property” and “serious disruption to the life of the community” should not automatically apply to a transitory and peaceful march.

The Met intends to be “sharper” picking up individuals who break the law by violence, hate speech, advocating support for an illegal terrorist organisation such as Hamas, chanting “from the river to the sea” or the “intimidation of others”.

But in reality when hundreds of thousands take to the streets, police resources are stretched controlling the mass flow of people, without sending in snatch squads which are likely to provoke disorder.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Keep calm and carry on

Ms Braverman called the Palestinian marches “an assertion of primacy by certain groups – particularly Islamists – of the kind we are used to seeing in Northern Ireland” with “reminiscent” reports of “links to terrorist groups, including Hamas”.

All traditions, and the PSNI, are offended. The deputy commissioner of the Metropolitan Police had already stated: “What we cannot do is interpret support for the Palestinian cause more broadly as being support for Hamas or any other proscribed group.”

“Primacy” is one thing. A passing parade, however large and however profound the passions it stirs, is another.

London’s Metropolitan Police are far from perfect, but on how to handle 11 November 2023 Sir Mark seems to have a firmer grasp on the fundamentals of our liberal democratic society than the home secretary.

Keep calm and carry on.

Continue Reading

Politics

SEC approves conversion of Grayscale’s large-cap crypto fund into ETF

Published

on

By

<div>SEC approves conversion of Grayscale's large-cap crypto fund into ETF</div>

<div>SEC approves conversion of Grayscale's large-cap crypto fund into ETF</div>

Grayscale has slowly narrowed the arbitrage opportunities on its crypto trusts by converting them into exchange-traded funds.

Continue Reading

Politics

Chief rabbi condemns BBC’s ‘mishandled response’ to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury – as Bob Vylan issue new statement

Published

on

By

Chief rabbi condemns BBC's 'mishandled response' to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury - as Bob Vylan issue new statement

The chief rabbi has described the BBC’s response to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury as “belated and mishandled” – as the punk-rap duo involved, Bob Vylan, said the UK government needed to talk about its “criminal inaction”.

Sir Ephraim Mirvis said “vile Jew-hatred” had been aired at the Somerset music festival and it was a “time of national shame”.

Confidence in the BBC’s “ability to treat antisemitism seriously” has been brought to a “new low”, he said in a post on X, adding that “outright incitement to violence and hatred” appeared to be acceptable if it was couched as “edgy political commentary”.

Ordinary people had not only failed to see incitement “for what it is” but had cheered it, chanted it, and celebrated it, he said. “Toxic Jew-hatred is a threat to our entire society,” he added.

Bob Vylan, posting a new statement on Instagram on Tuesday, said they were “not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people”.

Rather, they were for the “dismantling of a violent military machine” – the Israel Defence Forces.

Bob Vylan chanted “death to the IDF” at Glastonbury. As many as 95% of the IDF are thought to be Jewish.

In their statement, the group said they were a “distraction from the story” and that whatever “sanctions” they received would also be a distraction.

Their US visas have been revoked and United Talent Agency, their US representatives, have dropped them.

Bob Vylan with their MOBO award in London in November 2022. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Bob Vylan with their MOBO award in London in November 2022. Pic: Reuters

Referring to the war in Gaza, they claimed the UK government does not want them to ask “why they remain silent in the face of this atrocity”, “why they aren’t doing more to stop the killing” and “feed the starving”.

They added: “The more time they talk about Bob Vylan, the less time they spend answering for their criminal inaction.

“We are being targeted for speaking up. We are not the first, we will not be the last, and if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too.”

It has emerged that Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, was at Glastonbury when the duo led chants of “Death to the IDF” which were broadcast live.

The prime minister’s spokesman, asked if the PM had confidence in Mr Davie, said Sir Keir Starmer had “confidence in the BBC”, adding: “The position of the director-general is a matter for the BBC’s board.”

Speaking in the Commons, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said “accountability” was important and it was something she had “impressed upon the BBC leadership”.

She added: “When you have one editorial failure, it’s something that must be gripped. When you have several, it becomes a problem of leadership.”

The cabinet minister said she’d called Mr Davie after Bob Vylan’s set had been broadcast to find out why it had aired, and why the feed had not been cut.

“I expect answers to these questions without delay,” she said.

Meanwhile Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the culture, media and sport committee, has written to Mr Davie in relation to the corporation’s Glastonbury coverage.

The committee has said the letter asks about editorial and decision-making processes and whether consideration was given to broadcasting with a delay. It also asks about staffing levels at the festival and contingency planning.

Secretary of State for Culture, Media, and Sport Lisa Nandy arrives in Downing Street, London, for a Cabinet meeting. Picture date: Tuesday May 13, 2025.
Image:
Lisa Nandy, the culture secretary, has claimed there is a ‘problem of leadership’ at the BBC. File pic: PA

Avon and Somerset Police has begun a criminal investigation and is reviewing footage of both Bob Vylan and Kneecap’s performances at Glastonbury.

The force said a senior detective had been appointed – and it had been contacted by people from around the world.

“We… recognise the strength of public feeling,” it said.

During Kneecap’s set, one member suggested starting a “riot” outside his bandmate’s forthcoming court appearance, before clarifying that he meant “support”. Liam Og O hAnnaidh, also known as Mo Chara, is charged with a terror offence.

Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap perform at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Moglai Bap and Mo Chara of Kneecap performing at Glastonbury. Pic: Reuters

Bob Vylan had been due to tour the US before their visas were revoked.

US deputy secretary of state Christopher Landau said action had been taken “in light of their hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants”.

“Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” he added.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

During Bob Vylan’s set, the duo performed in front of a screen that showed several messages, including one that claimed Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to “genocide”.

The war in Gaza began after Hamas militants attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 and killed 1,200 people and took about 250 hostage.

Israel’s offensive in Gaza has led to the deaths of more than 56,500 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants.

Read more from Sky News:
Starmer faces rebellion at key welfare cuts vote
Trump piles more pressure on central bank chief

Media watchdog Ofcom has said the BBC “clearly has questions to answer” over the live stream from Glastonbury.

A BBC spokesperson said: “The director-general was informed of the incident after the performance and at that point he was clear it should not feature in any other Glastonbury coverage.”

The broadcaster respects freedom of expression but “stands firmly against incitement to violence”, they said.

They added: “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves…

“The team were dealing with a live situation, but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Connecticut governor approves law prohibiting crypto use in government

Published

on

By

Connecticut governor approves law prohibiting crypto use in government

Connecticut governor approves law prohibiting crypto use in government

Many provisions of the legislation, which received overwhelming support in the state House and Senate, take effect on Oct. 1.

Continue Reading

Trending