This post was contributed by Guy Collender from Birkbeck’s Department of External Relations

Legal experts analysed and challenged the controversial police tactics used against protestors in the UK as part of Law on Trial at Birkbeck. 

The lawyers emphasised the role of protest throughout history, and argued that heavy-handed policing and cuts to legal aid are undermining dissent. The police, it was predicted, are likely to increase their use of stop-and-search powers during the Olympics this summer. The presentations largely focused on kettling – confining demonstrators to a small area – and the response of the authorities to occupations. 

Professor Bill Bowring, of Birkbeck’s School of Law and the International Secretary of the Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers, chaired the public event on 19 June as part of Law on Trial – a week-long series of legal talks. He began by explaining the School’s progressive and critical approach to the study of law. Bowring said: “We do not take law for granted as something that comes down from above with some sort of divine status. We interrogate it.”

Kat Craig, a solicitor at Christian Khan and Vice-chair of the Haldane Society, continued by highlighting how dissent has played a “fundamental and crucial role” in changing society for the better, including gaining the right for women to vote. However, she pointed out that current major cuts to legal aid and the exclusion of certain areas of protest law from such support are undermining access to justice.

Craig spoke about representing protestors engaged in litigation against state bodies, including the police and Home Office. In particular, she mentioned cases against the police use of kettling, which has become commonplace during demonstrations, including student protests, in recent years. She said: “Kettling is indiscriminate. I am firmly of the view that kettling is an infringement of Article 5 [the right to liberty and security of person, European Convention on Human Rights]. The House of Lords and the European Court of Human Rights have disagreed, both saying that kettling is not a breach of Article 5.

Owen Greenhall, a pupil barrister at Garden Court Chambers and an Executive Committee member of the Haldane Society, referred to protestor occupations during his presentation. He briefly outlined the history of such events, from the Greensboro sit-ins at segregated food counters in North Carolina in the 1960s to the more recent protests in London in Parliament Square and outside St Paul’s Cathedral.

Greenhall highlighted the trend towards by-laws restricting certain activities in high-profile places, and the difficulty of challenging these new rules. For example, the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 includes provisions for a “constable or authorised officer” to stop protestors engaging in “prohibited activities”, including using “amplified noise equipment”, erecting tents and using “sleeping equipment” in Parliament Square. A similar by-law has also been passed in relation to Trafalgar Square.

During the question and answer session, concerns were expressed by Craig about the likely increase in the use of stop-and-search in East London during the Olympics.

Listen to the audio recording of the presentations

This post was contributed by Guy Collender from Birkbeck’s Department of External Relations

The fear was tangible. Office workers scurried home early, shops were boarded up, and watching the nightly news became a habit borne out of anxiety. Are the riots still spreading? When will order return to the streets?

The rioting in England last summer sparked much soul-searching. Is our society broken? Can we expect more looting and violence on our streets? Or were the activities of those four nights last August an aberration?

Politicians, the police, commentators and the rioters themselves quickly rushed to varying conclusions to explain what caused the outbreak of civil disorder, which quickly spread across London and to other cities, including Birmingham, Nottingham, Liverpool and Manchester. David Cameron spoke about “criminality, pure and simple”, Ken Clarke blamed a “feral underclass”, and others blamed the police, government cuts, inequality and marginalisation for causing the anger and violence that erupted during those summer evenings.

All these issues and the drama of the riots were re-visited during a talk at Birkbeck about a pioneering research project to understand the lives and motivations of the young people out on the streets, and fill the void left by the absence of a major official public enquiry. The talk on 20 June was one of the highlights of Law on Trial – a week-long series of events organised by Birkbeck’s School of Law about crime, order and justice.

Professor Tim Newburn, of LSE, explained how the unusual and rapid research collaboration between The Guardian and LSE (funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation) began, and he shared its findings based on one-to-one interviews with 270 people involved, or close to, the riots.

Newburn summarised the results of the Reading the Riots study, which were printed in The Guardian last December. The majority of those involved in the riots were young (65% were between the ages of 10-20); 79 per cent were male, and their main activities were identified as follows: anti-police (24 per cent), looting (40 per cent), criminal damage (14 per cent), and as observers (22 per cent).

The rioters’ accounts revealed how many regarded the events as exciting (“the best three days of my life”), an opportunity to loot, and a way of expressing their widespread anger and hostility towards the police. Many of the young people also spoke about poverty, austerity and the lack of opportunities. Of the adults prosecuted for rioting, 35 per cent of them were claiming out-of-work benefits (as compared to 12 per cent within the working age population).

Newburn said: “It has come to an extremely bad position where young people talk about this [the riots] as an exciting opportunity. The sheer widespread mass looting that occurred is of a completely different order.”

Emphasising that “there is no simple explanation” for the riots, Newburn listed a range of reasons, including a “broad sense of disenchantment”, “a substantive experience of social marginalisation”, and “a sense of diminishing opportunities in modern England.” He also warned that riots are “more, rather than less, likely” in future because the conditions that caused them in the first place are still present, and may even be deteriorating. Almost 40 per cent of those interviewed said they would get involved again in future. This is a sobering thought indeed, especially as the eyes of the world will be focused on London this summer during the Olympics.

Results from the second phase of the Reading the Riots study, based on interviews with police officers, defence lawyers, victims and vigilantes, are to be published in The Guardian in early July.