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 and Gemini ask to pause lawsuit to explore ‘potential resolution’

Published

on

By

SEC and Gemini ask to pause lawsuit to explore ‘potential resolution’

SEC and Gemini ask to pause lawsuit to explore ‘potential resolution’

The US Securities and Exchange Commission and crypto exchange Gemini have asked to pause the regulator’s suit over the exchange’s Gemini Earn program, saying they want to discuss a potential resolution. 

In an April 1 letter to New York federal court judge Edgardo Ramos, lawyers representing the SEC and Genesis requested a 60-day hold on the case and that all deadlines be pulled “to allow the parties to explore a potential resolution.” 

“In this case, the parties submit that it is in each of their interests to stay this matter while they consider a potential resolution and agree that no party or non-party would be prejudiced by a stay,” the letter states.

The lawyers added that a stay was in the court’s interest as “a resolution would conserve judicial resources” and proposed that a joint status report be submitted within 60 days after the entry of the stay.

The SEC sued Gemini and crypto lending firm Genesis Global Capital in January 2023, alleging they offered unregistered securities through the Gemini Earn program.

In March 2024, Genesis agreed to pay $21 million to settle charges related to the lending program, but the enforcement case against Gemini remains outstanding.

SEC and Gemini ask to pause lawsuit to explore ‘potential resolution’

Letter from SEC and Genesis Global requesting extension of stay. Source: CourtListener

The letter did not specify what a possible resolution would entail, but the SEC has dropped several lawsuits it launched against crypto companies under the Biden administration, including against Coinbase, Ripple and Kraken.

Related: Will new US SEC rules bring crypto companies onshore?

In February, Gemini said the SEC closed a separate investigation into the firm as the regulator winds back its crypto enforcement under President Donald Trump. 

“The SEC cost us tens of millions of dollars in legal bills alone and hundreds of millions in lost productivity, creativity, and innovation. Of course, Gemini is not alone,” Gemini co-founder Cameron Winklevoss said at the time.

OpenSea, Crypto.com and Uniswap, among others, have also recently reported that the SEC had closed similar probes into their companies that were investigating alleged breaches of securities laws.

Magazine: Bitcoin ATH sooner than expected? XRP may drop 40%, and more: Hodler’s Digest, March 23 – 29

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto PAC-backed Republicans win US House seats in Florida special elections

Published

on

By

Crypto PAC-backed Republicans win US House seats in Florida special elections

Crypto PAC-backed Republicans win US House seats in Florida special elections

Two Republicans who received a combined $1.5 million from the crypto-backed political action committee (PAC) Fairshake will enter the US House after winning special elections in Florida.

Republican Jimmy Patronis won the vacant seat in Florida’s 1st Congressional District to replace Matt Gaetz, taking 57% of the vote to defeat Democrat Gay Valimont, according to AP News data.

Randy Fine also took Florida’s 6th Congressional District with 56.7% of the vote to beat his Democratic rival, public school teacher Josh Weil, and fill a seat left vacant by Mike Waltz, who took a job as White House national security adviser.

Florida’s 1st and 6th Congressional Districts — located in Florida’s western panhandle and along the state’s northeast coast — have been controlled by Republicans for roughly 30 years, but their lead has narrowed in recent years.

Fairshake, a PAC backed by crypto industry giants including Coinbase, Ripple and Andreessen Horowitz, gave Fine around $1.16 million in advertising spending and funneled $347,000 to Patronis to support his campaign.

Both Republicans have expressed support for the crypto industry, with Fine stating in a Jan. 14 X post that “Floridians want crypto innovation!”

Crypto PAC-backed Republicans win US House seats in Florida special elections

Source: Randy Fine

Fairshake and its affiliates poured around $170 million into the 2024 US presidential and congressional elections to back candidates who committed to supporting the crypto industry.

The wins by Patronis and Fine increased Republican representation in the House to 220 seats, with the Democrats holding 213 seats.

There are two vacant seats to be filled after Texas and Arizona Democrats Sylvester Turner and Raúl Grijalva died on March 5 and March 13, respectively.

Florida can expect to see a crypto-friendly regulatory environment 

The victories for Patronis and Fine likely mean that crypto legislation will continue to see support in the US capital.

The Republican Party would have maintained its House majority even if it lost both seats in Florida, but it would have made it more difficult for some of the recently introduced Republican-backed crypto bills to pass through the House and Senate.

Related: Florida bill proposes strict rules against online gambling

At the Digital Assets Summit on March 18, Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna said he believes Congress “should be able to get” both a stablecoin and crypto market structure bill done this year.

Bills that could eventually make their way to the House include the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, which passed the Senate Banking Committee in an 18-6 vote on March 13.

Senator Cynthia Lummis also reintroduced a Bitcoin reserve bill about a week after the Trump administration announced the establishment of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve on March 6, with the legislation referred to the Senate Banking Committee on March 11.

Magazine: Trump’s crypto ventures raise conflict of interest, insider trading questions

Continue Reading

Politics

UK trade bodies ask government to make crypto a ‘strategic priority’

Published

on

By

UK trade bodies ask government to make crypto a ‘strategic priority’

UK trade bodies ask government to make crypto a ‘strategic priority’

Several British trade associations have asked Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s office to appoint a special envoy dedicated to crypto and for a dedicated action plan for digital assets and blockchain technology.

In a March 31 letter, the coalition of six UK digital economy trade bodies urged Starmer’s special adviser on business and investment, Varun Chandra, for a “greater strategic focus and alignment to deliver investment, growth and jobs” for the crypto industry. 

The group, which consisted of the UK Cryptoasset Business Council, Global Digital Finance, The Payments Association, Digital Currencies Governance Group, the Crypto Council for Innovation and techUK, noted the US policy shift on crypto under President Donald Trump and his appointment of a crypto czar.

Britain’s commitment to an economic trade deal focused on technological cooperation with the US “presents a significant opportunity to mirror the United States’ ambition in fostering leadership in blockchain, digital assets, and other emerging financial technologies,” the letter stated. 

The group recommended that the UK appoint a blockchain special envoy, similar to the US, to coordinate policy, foster innovation, and position the country competitively in global markets.

The trade bodies also called for the development of a dedicated government action plan for crypto and blockchain technology, including a concierge service to attract high-potential firms.

They added that the government should acknowledge and leverage the commonalities between blockchain, quantum computing and artificial intelligence technologies, including potential applications for government services.

Another recommendation was to create a high-level industry-government-regulator engagement forum to ensure informed decision-making and cross-sector collaboration.

UK trade bodies ask government to make crypto a ‘strategic priority’

The UK crypto and tech associations lobbying the government for a policy shift. Source: LinkedIn

“With deep pools of talent, access to capital, world-class academic institutions, and sophisticated regulators, the UK provides an environment where digital assets and blockchain innovation can thrive,” they stated. 

Related: UK should tax crypto buyers to boost stock investing, economy, says banker

The coalition argues that crypto and blockchain technology could boost the UK economy by 57 billion British pounds ($73.6 billion) over the next decade, with the sector potentially increasing global gross domestic product by 1.39 trillion pounds ($1.8 trillion) by 2030.

Tom Griffiths, the co-founder and managing partner of crypto compliance advisory firm BitCompli, said in response to the letter on LinkedIn that the Financial Conduct Authority “has a lot of talent and a good sight of future plans, but the UK is definitely losing pace with Dubai, Singapore, and other EU jurisdictions.”

“Now is the time for the FCA to act, or the UK will lose out on this huge opportunity, which is digital assets and all the benefits this sector can bring, not only now but over the next 20 years,” he added.

Magazine: Bitcoin ATH sooner than expected? XRP may drop 40%, and more: Hodler’s Digest, March 23 – 29

Continue Reading

Trending