Article Details


Policing protests: would mediation help?
27.08.2009

As the Camp for Climate Action 2009 pitched its tents in Blackheath, south east London, yesterday how will the police react to protesters after the publicity they received over their actions at the G20 demonstrations in London in April?

 

The actions of the police there should lead to important changes in policing future demonstrations. Although some demonstrators were violent, most were peaceful. Ian Tomlinson, who had nothing to do with the demonstration, died and there has been grave concern at the police treatment of many demonstrators, in particular the decision to "kettle" people by keeping them in one area for several hours.

 

Last month Parliament’s Human Rights Committee recommended that in future independent negotiators should facilitate dialogue between police and protesters to overcome the distrust and tensions between them and so act in a similar role to Acas in industrial disputes. The Independent Police Complaints Commission and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and similar bodies could assist in identifying and assisting the negotiators and draw on the good practice in this area in Northern Ireland.

 

Mediation is voluntary. It is used to resolve disputes in litigation, the workplace, the community and international conflicts. The mediator is neutral. He or she chairs discussions between the parties and meets them privately. The parties propose ways of resolving the dispute and the mediator facilitates the discussions. Mediation is particularly useful where there is, or is thought to be, an imbalance of power between the parties.

 

An alternative to mediation is imposing a decision as happens in Northern Ireland. The Parades Commission is a non-statutory body set up in 1997 by Parliament to seek to avoid the violence of some annual parades.

 

It has been an unqualified success. Its seven commissioners and chairman represent a cross-section of the Northern Irish community. The commission using its authorised officers encourages the parties to agree routes and conditions but, if there is no agreement, it can decide the routes for the parades and conditions for the conduct of the parades.

 

In 2007-08, it received notification of 3,849 parades and of 250 that required detailed consideration, only 147 needed the imposition of conditions on a proposed route. Independent monitors as well as the authorised officers attend each contentious parade and report back to the commission so it knows what actually takes place after its decision.

 

Most protesters can agree matters with the police before demonstrations. Assistant Commissioner Chris Allison told the Human Rights Committee: “The vast majority of public order events pass off perfectly satisfactorily and peacefully, to the satisfaction of everybody. That is because we have that liaison and that discussion, where, in effect, there is an agreement beforehand, from both sides, about what is going to take place, so there are no surprises on the day, as you say in your report. Therefore, there is no conflict.”

 

Some protesters do not trust the police. The Climate Camp Team told the Human Rights Committee that dialogue between the police and protesters was unlikely to work in practice "except as another means to exert control" because of "the significant imbalance of power" between the two sides.

 

As The Times reported last Friday, the Metropolitan Police tried to get the organisers of the Climate Camp’s mass campsite to disclose the location of the event being held until September 2. No direct action is planned and the police intend to use a community-style policing operation that will limit the use of surveillance units and stop-and-searches wherever possible.

 

There has apparently been liaison between the police and Climate Camp representatives to ensure that each knows what the other is going to do. And the Met is planning to provide operational information to protesters taking part in the camp through a Twitter account.

 

However, Assistant Commissioner Allison, who has overall responsibility for policing the camp, has refused to rule out containment. The Times reported that the police needed to retain containment as a “tactical option” but had received no evidence to suggest that it would be needed at the new camp.

 

Unfortunately, the new police tactics have not resulted in agreement. In their response released on YouTube and http://climatecamp.org.uk <http://climatecamp.org.uk> , Climate Camp stated that: “Judging from past experience the best thing the police could do to ensure the health and safety of Climate Camp in 2009 would be to stay as far away from it as possible.”

 

Therefore, as distrust between demonstrators and police remains, the Home Secretary should follow the Human Rights Committee’s recommendation and set up a team of independent negotiators to mediate between the parties but should also set up a team of independent monitors to report on what actually takes place at the demonstrations.

 

The benefit of independent monitors is that demonstrators and police will know that they are there and there will be no doubt about what goes on at the demonstrations and whether any agreement has been followed.

 

If the scheme of independent negotiators and monitors did not work, the Home Secretary should set up a body equivalent to the Parades Commission suitably adapted to the English circumstances.

 

In reaching his decision, the Home Secretary should consider these questions. Is legislation required? Is a voluntary scheme likely to be effective? Should mediators be trained for this work and, if so, what should that training be and who should carry it out? What should the format of the mediation be - who should attend, should lawyers be permitted to attend, should the mediation have a fixed time limit, should discussions be confidential, should any agreement reached be enforceable by a civil injunction or a criminal remedy; should the mediator have power to impose binding conditions on the demonstration in the absence of an agreement? How will the scheme be funded?

 

The Home Secretary has a real opportunity to influence the way demonstrations are policed. He should seize that opportunity as soon as possible. 

Copyright © Littleton Chambers 2007-2009Terms of Use   |  Site Map   |  Accessibility  |  Privacy Policy
Designed by Thinking Fish