Royal wedding protesters lose court appeal against Metropolitan Police
The 20 individuals had accused the Metropolitan Police of Prince "suppressing anti-monarchist sentiment"
Wednesday 22 January 2014
Republican activists who protested at the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton lost a legal appeal on Wednesday, against a ruling on the conduct of the Metropolitan Police.
When a case brought by 20 individuals, who claimed they were the victims of unlawful searches and arrests, went to London's High Court in 2012, the Met were accused of effectively "suppressing anti-monarchist sentiment" at the time of the April 2011 event.
But Lord Justice Richards and Mr Justice Openshaw ruled the police, who argued that their action was justified and proportionate, had acted within their powers and were not guilty of operating an unlawful policy.
The 20 were among scores arrested or subjected to searches before or on the wedding day. One group involved 15 protesters arrested at various locations in London, including at a Starbucks in Oxford Street, Charing Cross and those attending the Queer Resistance "zombie picnic" in Soho Square.
Their lawyers said the case touched on "the most important of constitutional rights, namely the right to free expression and to protest, both of which are elemental to a properly functioning democracy".
The 2012 finding by the two judges is no longer the subject of challenge but an appeal was brought on behalf of four people, as test cases, on whether the deprivation of their liberty contravened Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
On Wednesday, Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Lord Justice Leveson and Lord Justice Aikens in the Court of Appeal said they were satisfied that the arrests and detentions were lawful pursuant to Article 5, which relates to liberty and security of person..
Dismissing the appeals, Lord Justice Maurice Kay said the court had decided that it was not bound to follow a recent decision by European judges in Strasbourg in this area, noting that it was neither a decision of the Grand Chamber , nor was it indicative of "clear and constant" Strasbourg jurisprudence.
- 2 Harry Potter fans can apply to the Hogwarts-inspired College of Wizardry
- 3 Jessica Chambers: 19-year-old woman 'doused with lighter fluid and burned alive' in the US
- 4 Russell Brand calls Nigel Farage 'poundshop Enoch Powell' in BBC Question Time debate
- 5 Orange Wednesdays are no more
Weather bomb in pictures: Storms cuts power for tens of thousands – and snow is on the way
Jessica Chambers: 19-year-old woman 'doused with lighter fluid and burned alive' in the US
Russell Brand calls Nigel Farage 'poundshop Enoch Powell' in BBC Question Time debate
Russell Brand was rendered speechless on Question Time by this man
Fury at Airbus after it hints the super-jumbo may be mothballed
Nigel Farage: Me vs Russell Brand on Question Time – he's got the chest hair but where are his ideas?
Shock poll shows voters believe Ukip is to the left of the Tories
Disgruntled RBS worker writes hilarious open letter to Russell Brand after anti-capitalist publicity stunt leaves him hungry
New era of cheap oil 'will destroy green revolution'
Ukip founder Alan Sked and Nigel Farage 'begged Enoch Powell to stand as a candidate'
Ukip candidate jokes about 'shooting peasants' in racist and homophobic rant
£35000 per annum + Benefits: Ampersand Consulting LLP: 3rd Line Support Engine...
£240 - £275 per day: Investigo: Support the global business through in-depth a...
£32000 - £38000 per annum + Bonus and Benefits: Ampersand Consulting LLP: Serv...
£38000 - £44000 per annum + Bonus and Benefits: Ampersand Consulting LLP: Virt...