Al-Quds Day is billed as a pro-Palestine event and was created after the 1979 revolution in Iran. It’s organised by a campaign group called the Islamic Human Rights Commission.
The government approved a request from the Metropolitan police to ban the marching protest, after the force said it was concerned about the large numbers of protesters and counter-protesters, and that the organisers were “supportive of the Iranian regime”.
The Commission argued that it was to be a peaceful protest, but despite the ban on a marching protest, it said a “static” one will take place instead.
So what is a static protest, and what rights do police and protesters have?
What is a static protest?
Static protests are those which have to stay in one specific spot, unlike protests where those taking part move through streets or follow a route.
Organisers of a static protest do not need to get permission from the police beforehand.
But if a senior police officer thinks the protest may result in “serious public disorder, damage to property, disruption to the community, a disruptive amount of noise, or is intended to intimidate members of the public”, then they “may impose conditions on a protest,” Dr James Greenwood-Reeves, a law lecturer at the University of Leeds, told FactCheck.
However, the police “cannot outright ban most peaceful static protests in advance”.
What powers do police have over static protests?
The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act was introduced by the Conservative government in April 2022. When the Bill was introduced, it was criticised for its restrictive measures by a number of organisations, including the Good Law Project campaign group, who said it was “a serious threat to the right to protest”.
In a Home Office policy paper published in 2022, the government said the new protest measures were needed because “over recent years, certain tactics used by some protesters have caused a disproportionate impact on the hardworking majority seeking to go about their everyday lives”.
The Act gave police officers the power to place more conditions on static protests and demonstrations, including imposing start and finish times, restrictions on location and maximum noise levels.
The Act also made it easier for police to use stop and search powers, as they can now search individuals “without reasonable suspicion in specific locations,” Thompsons Solicitors said.
Dr Greenwood-Reeves also told FactCheck that “police can use ‘breach of the peace’ powers to arrest and detain protesters or counterprotesters” during both static and marching protests.
He explained that “breach of the peace” is not a crime in itself, but a power police use to prevent the risk of disorder.
But any police response to protests – either static or moving – is subject to their duty, under the Human Rights Act 1998, not to “disproportionately interfere with protesters’ rights to freedom of assembly and freedom of expression”, Dr Greenwood-Reeves added.
That means police can only interrupt a protest when there’s a legitimate reason, such as “preventing crime, or protecting national security or the rights of other members of the public”, he said.
What are the protesters’ rights?
Protesters have rights to protest peacefully under the Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic law.
This includes the Article 10 right to freedom of expression and the Article 11 right to freedom of assembly.
Both of these mean that the state – including the police – can only intrude on their peaceful protests where the law permits it, where it’s necessary to protect a legitimate interest such as peace and security, and where its proportionate to achieving that aim.
“This means that peaceful protesters enjoy a fairly wide right to protest, including the right to protest for causes that are controversial,” Dr Greenwood-Reeves said.
Under the ECHR, nobody has a right to violent protest and those who threaten or use violence against people or property are not protected by the law.
Protests that aim to cause fear, harassment, or incite violence are all prohibited by law and protesters must also not demonstrate support to prohibited organisations.
David Mead, professor of UK human rights law at the University of East Anglia, told FactCheck that for those who disagree with a protest ban and want to challenge this, it is “always easier when conditions or a ban have been imposed in advance”. This is because the affected group then has time to “seek a court challenge by mounting a judicial review in the High Court”.