London – On Tuesday night, British lawmakers allowed a controversial new law on policing, which critics say would reduce the public’s right to protest, to move on to the next stage of parliamentary debate. The “Law on Police, Crime, Penalties and Courts” has become the focal point of the demonstrations in London after police officers used heavy methods to interrupt a vigil for Sarah Everard, a 33-year-old woman who was killed last week while walking home at night.
The man accused of killing Everard is an acting policeman.
Protesters gathered in front of the House of Commons while Parliament was debating on Tuesday, shouting “Kill the bill”.
“It is not enough to say that the police do not protect us. We must say loud and clear that the police are the cause, not the solution, of the racist and sexist violence that we are experiencing,” said a protest organizer to the crowd gathered in Parliament Square in London during the fourth day of protests in the city.
“This is for Sarah and for all the other women,” said Ngozi Fulani, who runs the London-based charity Sistah Space against domestic violence. “Sandra Bland, Breonna Taylor, Blessing, whether they are in America or here, brutality is brutality.”
The policing bill
The “Police, Crime, Penalties and Courts Bill”, if passed by law, would give the police additional powers to restrict protests, including the imposition of start and end times for static demonstrations, as well as limit the noise that authorities consider causing, “intimidation or harassment.”
“The slack, lazy way this legislation is drafted would make a dictator blush,” said MP Gavin Robinson during the debate ahead of Tuesday’s vote. “The protests will be loud, the protests will disturb and no matter how offensive we may find the issue at its heart, the right to protest must be protected.”
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick said in a statement that she wanted to reform police powers after last year’s April Extinction Rebellion climate change demonstrations “, specifically to deal with protests where people are not primarily violent or disorderly, but, as in this case, they had an intention to bring the policing to its knees and stop the city. “
The bill would also make an offense a protest to block Parliament’s traffic entrances, effectively limiting the public’s right to protest outside the seat of the UK government.
After the violent policing of the vigil in honor of Sarah Everard on Saturday night – and in light of the fact that the man accused of killing Everard is a police officer – critics said that, in addition to raising questions of civil liberties, it reinforces the police. powers will do nothing to solve the problem of violence against women.
“We are tired of male violence, whether in the hands of the state, our partners, our family members or strangers,” said MP Nadia Whittome during Tuesday’s debate. Explaining that she participated in the protests against Everard’s policing of Saturday’s vigil and the bill, she added: “We march because some people do not survive male violence.”
Widespread opposition
More than 150 organizations, including human and religious rights groups and unions, sent an open letter on Monday to Britain’s Home Secretary, Priti Patel, who oversees UK law enforcement, asking her to reconsider the legislation.
They argued that the bill, which was only published for public scrutiny about a week ago, “is being rushed through parliament during a pandemic and before civil society and the public can fully understand its profound implications”.
HANNAH MCKAY / REUTERS
“For a country that is so often proud of civil liberties, this bill represents an attack on some of the most fundamental rights of citizens, particularly those from marginalized communities, and is being conducted at a time and in a way in which those who will be subject to its provisions are less able to respond “, says the letter.
Britain’s opposition Labor Party, which would initially abstain from voting, announced on Sunday that its lawmakers would vote against the bill. Still on Tuesday, the project moved on to the next phase of debate.
On Monday, in response to Everard’s assassination, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a separate plan to combat violence against women, increasing CCTV coverage and street lighting, and putting more undercover policemen on patrol in bars and clubs when they are allowed to open again.
But protesters argued that while CCTV and lighting can be beneficial, especially in the light of the Everard case, more empowered policemen will not solve the root of the problem.
“We don’t just want excessive policing and more policemen who abuse their powers in relation to women. We want real action,” said Jennifer, 25, during Monday’s demonstration. “We want to spend money on women’s services. We want there to be a cultural change that protects women and fights against misogyny and violence ”.
“They are taking over our control. I know my generation doesn’t want that,” said Nancy, 19, who was at a demonstration outside Parliament on Tuesday night. She promised that she would continue to protest the bill, despite any potential increase in police powers.
“People are afraid of being called radicals, crazy or hypersensitive, but especially with women, we do everything we can and we go home with friends, we call our boyfriends and we keep the keys between our fingers, so that’s all that we can left now. “