A Fleeting Victory for Protest

A fugue and a Twix dilemma

“What am I going to do with 13 Twixes?” Those were the words of a Lift The Ban supporter who was outside the Royal Courts of Justice on Friday. She had come prepared with a bag of snacks ready to give out to people as they were released from far flung police stations later that evening. Those who were sitting with signs saying “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”, were expecting to be arrested if the outcome of Friday’s judicial review was that the proscription of Palestine Action had been lawful. By 10 a.m. a crowd had gathered outside flanked by a large number of tripods, microphones and cameras. Soon after, the news started to ripple through the crowd: the judges had ruled the proscription of Palestine Action unlawful and were proposing “to make an order quashing the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action.” This was a crowd of people so used to feeling let down by the courts and who had little or no faith left in the UK justice system that they seemed unsure what to do with themselves. There was a collective sinking in moment, the cheering began and the smiles started to beam across a lot of very relieved faces.

The presence of the media at Palestine Action related cases has been underwhelming to say the least, but on Friday I couldn’t get my camera anywhere near the spokespeople as they were crowded out by cameras and reporters. I didn’t mind, I knew that there would be plenty of other outlets where people could watch those speeches from a better vantage point than I had. I have chosen instead to make the third film in what has now become my “Requiem For Protest” series. It has become a triptych of sorts as each film, scored by Kim Halliday, presents a progression of this story. This third film has changed from being a requiem to a fugue. Somehow a fugue seems appropriate: separate to its musical meaning it can also be defined as ‘a fleeting state’. It seems appropriate because I fear the decision made by the judges may itself be fleeting, but more on that later. This third film focuses on the joy and the relief of all those who have risked so much to fight this ban. This is a moment to applaud the sheer determination and the bravery of thousands of people who took the decision to sit quietly holding a sign that would lead them to a terrorism charge. This is a day to applaud their persistence, for they did not give up.

One of the proposed amendments to UK protest laws going through parliament at the moment is a ban on cumulative protests. On Friday there were many faces I’ve come to recognise over the months I’ve been covering this story. They kept coming out in a very ‘cumulative’ way. The Lift The Ban protest campaign has been effective, in part, because it was cumulative. If the amendment passes we will lose another crucial tactic that makes peaceful protest effective. Going on an organised march just one time is unlikely to effect change. Just ask the 1 million + somepeople in the UK who marched together in 2003 to try and stop the UK invading Iraq.

The Judgment

It has been reported that £700,000 (of our money) was spent by the government in their defence of the judicial review, and over £10 million policing the ban. That they are now appealing the decision on the surface seems an irresponsible waste of yet more money. But take a closer look at the judgment. I have read through it several times now and the grounds on which they found it unlawful are obscure. Even the judges themselves say its conclusion on the point that the Home Secretary did not follow her own procedure ‘may appear to rest on a very narrow basis’. Did they deliberately choose this narrow path so that it would fail at appeal? Craig Murray certainly thinks so. There are already a wealth of blogs from those in the legal profession, including those who come over as less aligned with the cause than Murray, who are in agreement with him that the ruling is flimsy. The illogical decision that the proscription should continue pending appeal, despite it being ruled unlawful, gives some credence to this theory.

The second ground on which the proscription was found to be unlawful was its interference with freedom of speech and assembly. The Lift The Ban campaign clearly demonstrated that. By proscribing, instead of relying on existing adequate criminal laws to prosecute offenders, a whole cohort of peaceful protesters became swept up in this. The police were obliged to arrest them for “showing support for a proscribed organisation”. The judiciary were then obliged to process them through our courts, courts that are already bursting at the seams. The Lift The Ban campaign very cleverly showed up the absurdity of the proscription as thousands of peaceful people, that no one in their right mind could think were dangerous, were arrested and dragged off the streets for the crime of sitting quietly holding a sign. The absurdity continued in the court room as I recounted in my recent article Theatre of the Absurd.

One of the frustrations with the legal system is how easily it can become divorced from what really is at stake here. As the legal community now pour over the technicalities and prepare their arguments so that the next chapter in this saga can play out, the reason that Palestine Action exists in the first place is not taken into consideration. If the UK government stopped supporting a genocide then people would not feel they have to protest in this way. It is not controversial to call it a genocide, the UN have called it that themselves, so why is the British government so unwilling to uphold human rights and do the right thing and stop being part of the supply chain aiding those perpetrating the genocide? That is what Palestine Action supporters want to stop, and even if you disapprove of their tactics, it is a valid wish, a wish driven by compassion for human beings who are being slaughtered. Where is the compassion in all this? There are many compassionate people in the UK, the Lift The Ban sign holders are a good example of that, but the actions - and inaction - of those in power are failing us miserably on that count.

What next for the sign holders?

After many of the press had peeled off to go and file their reports the rain started to fall. Nevertheless a number of Lift The Ban protesters remained stubbornly sat with their signs. As the proscription was still in place, should the police arrest them? The police had a dilemma. The officer they spoke to could not confirm to them whether they were to be arrested or not. Eventually he walked away saying he was off to get a cup of tea. No one was arrested for holding a sign showing support for a proscribed organisation that day, but later on The Met released a statement saying,

“officers will continue to identify offences where support for Palestine Action is being expressed, but they will focus on gathering evidence of those offences and the people involved to provide opportunities for enforcement at a later date, rather than making arrests at the time.”

The plea hearings due to continue on the following Monday and Tuesday were subsequently postponed. There will be no theatre of the absurd at Westminster Magistrates court for a while at least.

There must have been a lot of internal relief for those with terrorism charges that they can now see a pathway to a future where their charges may get lifted, but this story is far from over. I look forward to the day when the only thing we have to worry about is what to do with 13 unrequired Twixes.

---

Here are the links to :

REQUIEM FOR PROTEST I and REQUIEM FOR PROTEST II

---

My feature film, The Line We Crossed, that led me into covering protest rights in the first place is now available to stream.

We are also continuing cinema and community screenings of The Line We Crossed with Q&As, which I can highly recommend. There will be screenings in March in Rotherhithe, London Euston and Galashiels. Marcus Decker, Holly Cullen-Davies, Trudi Warner and I are among the Q&A panelists at some of those screenings.

This weekend I am heading to Hebden Bridge for the first UK Cinema screening of my latest feature film The Conspiracists (21 February). Other screenings are being added all the time and tickets have gone on sale to the public today for the screening at Curzon Soho (April 22). That screening will be followed by a Q&A hosted by Deborah Frances-White (The Guilty Feminist) with Noelle Cook and I. Tickets are also now available for the screenings at The Lexi (April 23) and Act One Cinema (April 26). Both of those showings will be followed by a Q&A with Noelle Cook and I.