News
The House of Lords ruling that the human rights of anti-war campaigners were violated when they were prevented from attending a lawful protest by police was a “wake-up call for democracy”, says the lawyer who represented the protesters.
Bindman and Partners lawyer, John Halford, says that in R (on the application of Laporte) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire the Law Lords gave a principled judgment on where the line must be drawn.
“Peaceful protest can only be prevented in the most extreme circumstances which are very far from this case. These campaigners wanted to protest lawfully against an unlawful war. The Lords have unhesitatingly said they had that right,” he says.
The test case was brought by Jane Laporte with 120 other anti-war campaigners who were stopped from attending the protest at RAF Fairford in March 2003—hours before the base was used for bombing raids on Iraq.
The campaigners had travelled in coaches from London to attend the demonstration but were stopped by Gloucestershire police and asked to re-board their coaches. Police then sealed the doors and escorted them back to London.
Both the High Court and Court of Appeal ruled that the forced
return was unlawful, but approved the police’s decision to turn the protestors back.
The Law Lords, however, unanimously held that the protesters’ human rights of free speech and assembly had been violated.
