|
|
 |
| |
Flying the flag for safe protest
The police must allow our long tradition of demonstration without danger to go on, argues Murad Qureshi
IT was good to see London acting as a venue and host on the international stage to world leaders at the G20 London Summit, which marked the latest stage in the emergence of a new economic order in which domination by the developed world is being challenged by rising powers like China – something l’ve spent time studying since my student days.
But for most Londoners the summit is probably going to be remembered for the way the Met policed the demonstrations and the circumstances surrounding the tragic death of Ian Tomlinson. I myself went on the “Put People First” demonstration on the Saturday before the summit, and, as someone who has been to similar demos over the years, I have noticed that the policing of events has got much heavier, both in terms of numbers and tactics, to the extent that some feel it is threatening people’s cherished right to assemble and protest.
Not surprisingly, I have received a number of emails criticising the methods adopted by the police. The Labour Group along with other parties on the London Assembly have called for a full and open debate on the legitimacy and appropriateness of the tactics used. The police have a duty to explain and justify their actions and we have called for a full report to be made to the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), where my fellow Labour Assembly Members, Jennette Arnold, John Biggs and Joanne McCartney, will be able to question the police. The next MPA meeting is on April 30, giving the police ample time to give an account of their actions.
To maintain confidence in the police, and for the sake of Mr Tomlinson’s family, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) investigation into the events surrounding the death of an apparently wholly innocent man should be carried out throughly and swiftly. If the public is to have confidence in the ability of the police to manage protests in a safe and appropriate manner, the circumstances surrounding Mr Tomlinson’s death must be fully disclosed as soon as is practicable.
In the meantime, we have had further witness reports and other video footage of police actions during and after the G20 protest, which appear to show the use of inappropriate force, police officers not displaying their identification numbers, the confiscation of film from photographers’ cameras and the corralling (“kettling”) of innocent but presumed guilty protesters for hours without food, water or access to toilets. This, for me, is totally unjustified. Dissent is not a crime, and one of the great things about this country is our proud heritage of protest.
In the wake of the G20 controversy we have also seen the police’s response to the Tamil protesters, particularly the sit-in at Parliament Square on the opening day of the House of Commons after the Easter break (some clearly have longer hols than others!). Here their actions have been commendably restrained.
Tamils in the UK feel themselves highly vulnerable at present, as the continued attacks by the Sri Lankan army on the Tamil Tigers’ last remaining stronghold on the island have resulted in the deaths of thousands of innocent civilians.
With feelings running so high among a community that would do anything to stop the assault on fellow Tamils, to the extent of starving themselves to death, a policy of sensitive policing has clearly been adopted by the Met in this instance, outside Parliament and on Westminster Bridge.
The policing of demo’s in central London is clearly going to run as a major issue for some time to come. Hopefully the appropriate lessons will be drawn from both the G20 and Tamil protests.
• Murad Qureshi is a Labour member of the
London Assembly
www.muradqureshi.com
|
 |
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
|
