Labour government to continue appeal over anti-protest law ruling

Legislation which significantly reduced the threshold at which the police could impose almost-unlimited conditions on protests to anything that they deemed caused ‘more than minor disruption’ was brought in by then Home Secretary Suella Braverman in June 2023.

The threshold had previously been set at anything that caused ‘serious disruption’.

Liberty challenged the legislation in court, arguing that it was unlawful since it had already been democratically rejected by MPs just a few months earlier, and was subsequently brought in “via the back door” through ‘secondary legislation’, which required less parliamentary scrutiny and debate.

In May 2024, the High Court agreed with Liberty’s arguments, ruling that “more than minor cannot mean serious”. The court also found that the government had failed to undertake a fair consultation period, instead only inviting thoughts from those it knew would be supportive of its proposals, such as the police but not protest groups.

The previous government had lodged an appeal against the ruling, and despite Liberty requesting an adjournment and meeting to discuss the regulations, the new government has now decided to continue the appeal. The appeal hearing is expected to take place later in the year.

Akiko Hart, Liberty’s director, said: “We are very disappointed that, despite a positive discussion about the impact of the unlawful regulation, the Home Secretary has taken the decision to continue this case. This legislation is undemocratic, unconstitutional and unacceptable.

“The Home Office’s decision to continue the case shows disregard for the rule of law and completely goes against previous statements from the Government just last month that they would not abuse the use of secondary legislation and that they would promote high standards of governance.

“With hundreds of people wrongfully arrested and convicted due to this unlawful legislation already, it is not right to continue to carry on with this law that should never have been made in the first place. The only right thing to do would be to quash this legislation once and for all.”

Katy Watts, lawyer at Liberty, added: “We brought this case to court to defend democracy and to ensure that a government is not allowed to wilfully ignore the rules at the expense of our fundamental human rights. The Home Secretary’s decision to appeal the Court’s decision shows a concerning disregard for the rule of law.

“The High Court ruling sent a clear message that legislation cannot be brought in through the back door ignoring the will of Parliament. This legislation was forced through without proper consultation and with Parliament having voted it down just a few months earlier.

“For us the ruling is clear – ministers cannot disregard the rule of law to pursue their own agenda.

“We will continue to challenge this case, defend democracy and stand up to power.”