Brian is in court Tuesday 30 May from 9am at Bow Street Magistrates Court for failing to comply with SOCPA conditions police placed upon him. This is the first case of its kind. It is not known what the outcome is likely to be but the police could be given more authority to remove Brian from Parliament Square. So... come along to the court and the Square to support if you can.
PRESS RELEASE
MONDAY 29 MAY 2006
BRIAN HAW IN COURT ON FIRST CASE RELATING TO SOCPA CONDITIONS
World renowned protest could end just before 5th anniversary
Tuesday 30 May, 9am, Bow Street Magistrates Court, London
The Parliament Square peace protestor, Brian, Haw, will be appearing in court tomorrow, Tuesday 30 May, for the first time since the Court of Appeal ruled that his protest is subject to the recent law banning unauthorised protest. [A]
One result of the court hearing could be that the police are given further authority to remove Mr Haw and/or his display from Parliament Square. Mr Haw has been continuing his non-stop protest against the government’s foreign policy since June 2001 and supporters are due to celebrate his 5 year stand on Friday 2 June. [B]
Mr Haw is charged with offences under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (SOCPA) for failing to comply with conditions that the police have placed upon his demonstration. After the Court of Appeal judgement on 8 May which ruled that Mr Haw was not exempt from the SOCPA regulations, the police granted him permission to continue his demonstration subject to a comprehensive list of conditions.
Whilst the SOCPA law states that organisers of protests who apply for permission must be granted it, it allows for a wholesale curbing of any demonstration by the application of police conditions covering the time and duration of a protest, where it may be carried out, the number of people attending and the noise that can be made and the number and size of placards and banners. It also allows for any senior police officer to change the conditions at any point with no notice. [C]
This case is believed to be the first prosecution relating to failure to comply with SOCPA conditions. Other prosecutions under SOCPA have been for organising or participating in unauthorised demonstrations and there have been a number of convictions as a result. [D]
Since Mr Haw received the summons, the police have acted to force him to comply with the conditions by removing the majority of his display in Parliament Square during the night of 23 May. He has been left with an area of 3 metres within which any placards and personal possessions and any possessions belonging to those of his supporters must remain. [E]
The list of police conditions relates to all aspects of Mr Haw’s demonstration. He considers that they are totally unreasonable, if not impossible to comply with, and his legal team have been considering seeking a judicial review of the conditions.
Since the raid on Mr Haw’s display, the police have been criticised by the Metropolitan Police Authority for the manner in which it was carried out. [F] It has also come to light that the Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, mis-led the Authority over the true cost of the operation. [G]
CONTACT & INFORMATION
Emma Sangster, supporter of Brian Haw; 07791 486484
Mr Haw’s solicitors: Bindman & Partners
www.parliament-square.org.uk
NOTES
A. For more on the Court of Appeal decision see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,,1770525,00.html
B. Mr Haw arrived in Parliament Square on 2 June 2001. His placards and banners amounted to both a body of material showing the injustice suffered by people, mainly in Iraq, as a result of this Government's foreign policy and also a huge show of support for Mr Haw's stand for peace and justice by people from all corners of the world.
C. For more information on the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 see:
www.parliamentprotest.org.uk or www.parliament-square.org.uk/defendanalysis.htm
D. For more on SOCPA prosecutions see:
www.parliamentprotest.org.uk or www.parliament-square.org.uk/defendaction.htm
E. For more on the dismantling of Brian Haw’s display by the police see:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1781182,00.html
F. For more on the criticism of the police for the dismantling of Mr Haw’s display see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,,1783584,00.html
G. For more on the Metropolitan Police Commissioner supplying misleading information see:
The Telegraph, 28 May 2006, http://tinyurl.com/q3f55
MONDAY 29 MAY 2006
BRIAN HAW IN COURT ON FIRST CASE RELATING TO SOCPA CONDITIONS
World renowned protest could end just before 5th anniversary
Tuesday 30 May, 9am, Bow Street Magistrates Court, London
The Parliament Square peace protestor, Brian, Haw, will be appearing in court tomorrow, Tuesday 30 May, for the first time since the Court of Appeal ruled that his protest is subject to the recent law banning unauthorised protest. [A]
One result of the court hearing could be that the police are given further authority to remove Mr Haw and/or his display from Parliament Square. Mr Haw has been continuing his non-stop protest against the government’s foreign policy since June 2001 and supporters are due to celebrate his 5 year stand on Friday 2 June. [B]
Mr Haw is charged with offences under the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (SOCPA) for failing to comply with conditions that the police have placed upon his demonstration. After the Court of Appeal judgement on 8 May which ruled that Mr Haw was not exempt from the SOCPA regulations, the police granted him permission to continue his demonstration subject to a comprehensive list of conditions.
Whilst the SOCPA law states that organisers of protests who apply for permission must be granted it, it allows for a wholesale curbing of any demonstration by the application of police conditions covering the time and duration of a protest, where it may be carried out, the number of people attending and the noise that can be made and the number and size of placards and banners. It also allows for any senior police officer to change the conditions at any point with no notice. [C]
This case is believed to be the first prosecution relating to failure to comply with SOCPA conditions. Other prosecutions under SOCPA have been for organising or participating in unauthorised demonstrations and there have been a number of convictions as a result. [D]
Since Mr Haw received the summons, the police have acted to force him to comply with the conditions by removing the majority of his display in Parliament Square during the night of 23 May. He has been left with an area of 3 metres within which any placards and personal possessions and any possessions belonging to those of his supporters must remain. [E]
The list of police conditions relates to all aspects of Mr Haw’s demonstration. He considers that they are totally unreasonable, if not impossible to comply with, and his legal team have been considering seeking a judicial review of the conditions.
Since the raid on Mr Haw’s display, the police have been criticised by the Metropolitan Police Authority for the manner in which it was carried out. [F] It has also come to light that the Commissioner, Sir Ian Blair, mis-led the Authority over the true cost of the operation. [G]
CONTACT & INFORMATION
Emma Sangster, supporter of Brian Haw; 07791 486484
Mr Haw’s solicitors: Bindman & Partners
www.parliament-square.org.uk
NOTES
A. For more on the Court of Appeal decision see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,,1770525,00.html B. Mr Haw arrived in Parliament Square on 2 June 2001. His placards and banners amounted to both a body of material showing the injustice suffered by people, mainly in Iraq, as a result of this Government's foreign policy and also a huge show of support for Mr Haw's stand for peace and justice by people from all corners of the world.
C. For more information on the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 see:
www.parliamentprotest.org.uk or www.parliament-square.org.uk/defendanalysis.htm
D. For more on SOCPA prosecutions see:
www.parliamentprotest.org.uk or www.parliament-square.org.uk/defendaction.htm
E. For more on the dismantling of Brian Haw’s display by the police see:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,,1781182,00.html F. For more on the criticism of the police for the dismantling of Mr Haw’s display see:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/antiwar/story/0,,1783584,00.html G. For more on the Metropolitan Police Commissioner supplying misleading information see:
The Telegraph, 28 May 2006,
http://tinyurl.com/q3f55 
e-mail:
Homepage:
