The home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, has announced plans to grant police in England and Wales enhanced powers to impose tougher conditions on protests by factoring in the “cumulative impact” of previous demonstrations. This proposal has ignited controversy among civil liberty groups, who fear it could severely curtail the right to protest.

Currently, organising a protest march in England and Wales requires at least six days’ written notice to the police, outlining the date, time, route, and organiser details. There is no requirement to inform police in advance of stationary protests, except in exceptional circumstances where immediate response is necessary. Police officers can intervene to impose restrictions if they reasonably believe a protest might cause serious public disorder, significant property damage, community disruption, or aims to intimidate others. Recent legislation, such as the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSC) and the Public Order Act 2023, has expanded police authority in this regard. Restrictions may include altering protest locations or routes, limiting protest duration, and capping attendance figures. For instance, pro-Palestinian marches have faced route and timing limitations, with one demonstration being moved to Trafalgar Square after the Metropolitan Police established an exclusion zone near Parliament.

Banning a protest outright is a more stringent measure that requires the consent of the home secretary. Such bans can be applied for specific areas and timeframes if police deem conditions insufficient to prevent serious public disorder or damage. Although formally limited, human rights advocates caution that stringent restrictions imposed under current laws can effectively act as bans in practice.

The proposed extension would allow senior police officers to consider the aggregate effect of multiple related protests when imposing conditions. This approach aims to address concerns about repeated demonstrations in the same location causing significant cumulative disruption to local communities. The idea gained traction following high-profile pro-Palestinian protests and a subsequent deadly attack at a Manchester synagogue, with officials emphasising the need to balance public safety and protest rights. The government’s Interior Ministry has highlighted that these new powers should help protect communities without indiscriminately curbing lawful demonstrations.

These measures build on a recent trend of tightening protest laws in the UK. The PCSC Act introduced a noise threshold for intervention, expanded conditions applicable to stationary protests, and created the offence of public nuisance carrying a maximum sentence of ten years, which has been frequently applied against environmental activists. Meanwhile, the Public Order Act 2023 introduced new offences targeting disruptive protest tactics such as “locking on” or tunnelling, and broadened stop-and-search powers related to protests.

Alongside these, the government has also recently enacted laws targeting dangerous disorder during protests. These include powers to arrest participants who wear face coverings to conceal identities and bans on possessing pyrotechnics at demonstrations. Offenders face fines and potential imprisonment. Nevertheless, critics argue that such measures risk suppressing legitimate protest activities and may disproportionately affect minority groups.

Government data from June 2022 to March 2024 indicates an increasing use of police powers to impose conditions on protests across England and Wales, reflecting a more assertive stance on managing public demonstrations. Guidance documents accompanying the PCSC Act and other legislation provide law enforcement and public authorities with frameworks to implement these enhanced powers effectively.

This evolving legal landscape reflects ongoing tensions between maintaining public order and safeguarding democratic freedoms. Supporters of the new powers argue they are necessary to prevent repeated disruptions and protect communities, while opponents warn they could undermine fundamental rights to peaceful assembly and free expression.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services