Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago
|
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? "
Yes, it's been eroding, the public order actually 2023 was a big step.
It was sadly, almost universally supported here on this forum. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago
|
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? "
Well yes if it stays at peaceful protest. But mobs are volatile and unpredictable. The police have to safeguard the hotel occupants and the general public in the surrounding area. They've done the right thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? "
Protesting outside a hotel is actually pretty sick, as well as at risk of escalating.
If they want to protest, do it outside parliament or the local town hall - it should be perfectly legal to protest against immigration, but this is the right move by police. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 39 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
I agree that the police have done the right thing.
I believe the reason for protests outside this hotel are for intimidation only. As mentioned, take the protests to Westminster and keep the pressure on there. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago
|
"I agree that the police have done the right thing.
I believe the reason for protests outside this hotel are for intimidation only. As mentioned, take the protests to Westminster and keep the pressure on there. "
Why the 180? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site) 39 weeks ago
|
All part of the plan.
If the government has unpopular or failing policies it can do two things.
Listen to the electorate and change course.
Or
Blame the electorate for complaining, censor the internet, ban protests, and lock up anyone who manages to get through the firewall and speak out.
Labour isn’t able to change course on immigration as it’s happy with the status quo.
So option 2 is the only option. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
So you think it’s right to be able to protest but the locations as to where people are allowed to protest should be restricted? I have a slight issue with that.
Yes of course when violence happens the police need to deal it, but how is preventing protests because of possible violence policed? There’s regular violence at the pro Palestine marches but they are never stopped to prevent a potential breach of the peace. There’s regular violence at football matches but they never stop people attending them. There’s regular violence at pro Isreal matches but….
You get my point.
I have the right to protest. I have the right to be in any public area. The police have no standing power to “move people along” unless a section 60 or section 44 is in place or if a crime is being committed.
To say “you can’t protest outside a hotel in case the occupants are alarmed or distressed”? Well the occupants can’t just say they are alarmed or distressed by perfectly legal activity taking place outside. Threats of violence etc is a different matter of course but can only be dealt with once they occur.
You could look at this and say the people are protesting because they feel their rights are being superseded by other people’s rights, and the government/police response is to take away ever more of their rights. That can very easily be deemed as deliberately pushing the protestors buttons?
The police have already taken steps at Epping to try and turn a peaceful protest into a riot by their own actions.
I have no plans to attend any protests for any cause as I don’t think on the whole that they achieve the desired goals. I just think this is gonna fuel the violent elements rather then quell them |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
If you don’t like government policies you’ll be prosecuted for peacefully protesting.
For balance on the migrant hotels, people tried to set them on fire last year. "
And those people should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. But you can’t treat peaceful protestors as potential arsonists. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? "
Do you know which hotel The section 44 notice has been issued. ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away?
Do you know which hotel The section 44 notice has been issued. ?"
I think it was in Canary Wharf but not 100%. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"So you think it’s right to be able to protest but the locations as to where people are allowed to protest should be restricted? I have a slight issue with that."
People should be allowed to protest against Israel and its policies. It would be pretty stupid to allow that outside a synagogue. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away?
Do you know which hotel The section 44 notice has been issued. ?
I think it was in Canary Wharf but not 100%. "
There were 2 protest last weekend outside hotels in london one was protested by the pink ladies the britannia and the other the barbican was protested by refugees welcome, police were assaulted at only one of the protested hotels. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
For balance on the migrant hotels, people tried to set them on fire last year.
And those people should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. But you can’t treat peaceful protestors as potential arsonists. "
That's exactly the job of the people who permit or deny specific protests. To prevent a protest becoming a riot. They look at history, crowd numbers, logistics, flashpoints, current events... Build a risk profile and make a decision to protect lives and property. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 39 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"I agree that the police have done the right thing.
I believe the reason for protests outside this hotel are for intimidation only. As mentioned, take the protests to Westminster and keep the pressure on there.
Why the 180?"
What 180? Be specific so we don't go around the houses  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *otMe66Man 39 weeks ago
Terra Firma |
"So you think it’s right to be able to protest but the locations as to where people are allowed to protest should be restricted? I have a slight issue with that.
Yes of course when violence happens the police need to deal it, but how is preventing protests because of possible violence policed? There’s regular violence at the pro Palestine marches but they are never stopped to prevent a potential breach of the peace. There’s regular violence at football matches but they never stop people attending them. There’s regular violence at pro Isreal matches but….
You get my point.
I have the right to protest. I have the right to be in any public area. The police have no standing power to “move people along” unless a section 60 or section 44 is in place or if a crime is being committed.
To say “you can’t protest outside a hotel in case the occupants are alarmed or distressed”? Well the occupants can’t just say they are alarmed or distressed by perfectly legal activity taking place outside. Threats of violence etc is a different matter of course but can only be dealt with once they occur.
You could look at this and say the people are protesting because they feel their rights are being superseded by other people’s rights, and the government/police response is to take away ever more of their rights. That can very easily be deemed as deliberately pushing the protestors buttons?
The police have already taken steps at Epping to try and turn a peaceful protest into a riot by their own actions.
I have no plans to attend any protests for any cause as I don’t think on the whole that they achieve the desired goals. I just think this is gonna fuel the violent elements rather then quell them"
You have the right to protest, but you do not have the right to obstruct people going about their business, to threaten or intimidate.
Do you think they were peaceful enough not to be dispersed? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
For balance on the migrant hotels, people tried to set them on fire last year.
And those people should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. But you can’t treat peaceful protestors as potential arsonists.
That's exactly the job of the people who permit or deny specific protests. To prevent a protest becoming a riot. They look at history, crowd numbers, logistics, flashpoints, current events... Build a risk profile and make a decision to protect lives and property."
One fire, or even half a dozen, does not make all protestors arsonists. If one follows that logic, all protests should be banned.
5 police officers hurt does not mean all protesters are out to harm the police. If one follows that logic, all protests should be banned.
How many people were harmed by the police? Doesn’t mean all police want to harm the public.
What if 3 of the people were holding a Union flag? Do we ban Union flags? Or just ban them in public? Or just ban them at protests? There seems to be no issue with other nation’s flags?
What if 3 of them were black? What if 3 of them were Hindu? What if 3 of them were pregnant women? What if 3 of them were in wheelchairs?
There’s a reason why the previous convictions of someone on trial are not disclosed to a jury prior to establishing guilt.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
For balance on the migrant hotels, people tried to set them on fire last year.
And those people should be prosecuted to the maximum extent of the law. But you can’t treat peaceful protestors as potential arsonists.
That's exactly the job of the people who permit or deny specific protests. To prevent a protest becoming a riot. They look at history, crowd numbers, logistics, flashpoints, current events... Build a risk profile and make a decision to protect lives and property.
One fire, or even half a dozen, does not make all protestors arsonists. If one follows that logic, all protests should be banned.
5 police officers hurt does not mean all protesters are out to harm the police. If one follows that logic, all protests should be banned.
How many people were harmed by the police? Doesn’t mean all police want to harm the public.
What if 3 of the people were holding a Union flag? Do we ban Union flags? Or just ban them in public? Or just ban them at protests? There seems to be no issue with other nation’s flags?
What if 3 of them were black? What if 3 of them were Hindu? What if 3 of them were pregnant women? What if 3 of them were in wheelchairs?
There’s a reason why the previous convictions of someone on trial are not disclosed to a jury prior to establishing guilt.
"
No, there needs to be evidence of anti social behaviour at that location.
Local authorities and police can't issue a CPN or any type of dispersal order without there being evidence or complaints. Generally, they are reactive to what has already happened, not put in place 'just in case'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
"
any links to back up your assertion? i've had a good look but there's nothing |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Why not have peaceful protests outside your local MPs offices or even houses, they really don't like that.
Protests face to face with immigrants or asylum seekers or whatever is more likely to turn violent and achieve nothing other than protest bans
Face down the government not the immigrants
No ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
any links to back up your assertion? i've had a good look but there's nothing"
There is something on Met Police's 'X' account. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
any links to back up your assertion? i've had a good look but there's nothing"
I was watching a YouTube where the police were notifying the people that were there that they had to leave. I tend to speed watch these things as I get bored of them fairly quickly. Fairly sure it was Canary Wharf tho. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why not have peaceful protests outside your local MPs offices or even houses, they really don't like that.
Protests face to face with immigrants or asylum seekers or whatever is more likely to turn violent and achieve nothing other than protest bans
Face down the government not the immigrants
No ?"
You don't go uninvited to an mp's house venting anger, you get your treatment at their surgery. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
any links to back up your assertion? i've had a good look but there's nothing
I was watching a YouTube where the police were notifying the people that were there that they had to leave. I tend to speed watch these things as I get bored of them fairly quickly. Fairly sure it was Canary Wharf tho. "
It's a joke one hotel gets 44 notice because migrants were seen coming out the hotel on delivery mopeds notice applied the other hotel were the police were in battles with anti fascist but gets no 44 notice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away? "
I would assume and hope this has been done for a very good reason. Perhaps it is purely based on previous protests there or maybe they have credible evidence of planned trouble. Not sure if police can do this on their own or if they need permission from a judge or mayr the home secretary. Does anyone know? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away?
I would assume and hope this has been done for a very good reason. Perhaps it is purely based on previous protests there or maybe they have credible evidence of planned trouble. Not sure if police can do this on their own or if they need permission from a judge or mayr the home secretary. Does anyone know? "
The pink ladies were not issued with a 44 notice they had left. The witnesses to the moped delivery riders coming out of the hotel were 44 noticed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Police have issued section 44 notices outside a London migrant hotel making it illegal to protest there for the next 28 days. Anyone violating the notice can be arrested on the spot for public order offences.
I’m no expert in law but what’s to stop them doing this at multiple locations and putting another notice in place when the current on ends?
Is the right to peaceful protest being taken away?
I would assume and hope this has been done for a very good reason. Perhaps it is purely based on previous protests there or maybe they have credible evidence of planned trouble. Not sure if police can do this on their own or if they need permission from a judge or mayr the home secretary. Does anyone know?
The pink ladies were not issued with a 44 notice they had left. The witnesses to the moped delivery riders coming out of the hotel were 44 noticed."
Thank you. I misunderstood the meaning of this section 44. I assumed incorrectly it meant a blanket ban on anyone protesting as opposed to targeted at individual people or groups. Thought the delivery moped thing was supposed to be clamped down on by now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why not have peaceful protests outside your local MPs offices or even houses, they really don't like that.
Protests face to face with immigrants or asylum seekers or whatever is more likely to turn violent and achieve nothing other than protest bans
Face down the government not the immigrants
No ?"
Their wives, husbands and children have a right to not be frightened by a load of protesters..
Some who don't seem to understand what peaceful actually means .. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
If you don’t like government policies you’ll be prosecuted for peacefully protesting.
For balance on the migrant hotels, people tried to set them on fire last year. "
What some people did last year isn’t irrelevant, guy faulkes tried to blow up parliament that also isn’t relevant, but should’t be used to stop people protesting. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *I TwoCouple 39 weeks ago
near enough |
"Why not have peaceful protests outside your local MPs offices or even houses, they really don't like that.
Protests face to face with immigrants or asylum seekers or whatever is more likely to turn violent and achieve nothing other than protest bans
Face down the government not the immigrants
No ?
Their wives, husbands and children have a right to not be frightened by a load of protesters..
Some who don't seem to understand what peaceful actually means .."
And the children of the immigrants families ? Is ok to scare them ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Why not have peaceful protests outside your local MPs offices or even houses, they really don't like that.
Protests face to face with immigrants or asylum seekers or whatever is more likely to turn violent and achieve nothing other than protest bans
Face down the government not the immigrants
No ?
Their wives, husbands and children have a right to not be frightened by a load of protesters..
Some who don't seem to understand what peaceful actually means ..
And the children of the immigrants families ? Is ok to scare them ?"
No, but that wasn't the point I was addressing..
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
What some people did last year isn’t irrelevant, guy faulkes tried to blow up parliament that also isn’t relevant, but should’t be used to stop people protesting."
You're right, what happened last year is not irrelevant. It's very relevant. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
