header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
02 July 2021 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7939 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights
printer mail-detail

We protest at these protest provisions

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
52122
Michael Zander QC on a report by the parliamentary Joint Human Rights Committee
  • Joint Human Rights Committee makes serious criticism of the public order provisions in the government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill.
  • Criticism includes a demand to remove the trigger for imposing conditions on processions and assemblies based on the noise and concern that the public nuisance offence may be used to criminalise non-violent protest.

A report of the parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights makes serious criticism of the public order provisions in the government’s Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill (HC 331, HL Paper 23, 22 June 2021).

The powerfully argued and strongly expressed 40-page report of the respected joint committee currently chaired by Baroness (Harriet) Harman, is bound to play a significant role when the Bill’s controversial public order provisions are debated by the House of Lords.

Noise

The joint committee says that the new trigger for imposing conditions on processions and assemblies based on the noise they generate should be

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Is inequality undermining trust?
The legal profession’s claim to be a ‘guardian of fairness’ is under scrutiny after stark findings on gender imbalance and opaque progression. Writing in NLJ this week, Joshua Purser of No5 Barristers’ Chambers and Govindi Deerasinghe of Global 50/50 warn that leadership remains dominated by a narrow elite, with men holding 71% of top court roles
NLJ this week: Freemasons ruling backs police transparency over privacy claims
A legal challenge to police disclosure rules has failed, reinforcing a push for transparency in policing. In NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth examines a case where the Metropolitan Police required officers to declare membership of groups like the Freemasons
NLJ this week: Right to grieve marks ‘major shift’ in employment law
Bereavement leave is undergoing a quiet but profound transformation. Writing in NLJ this week, Robert Hargreaves of York St John University explains how the Employment Rights Act 2025 introduces a day-one right to leave for a wider range of losses, alongside new provisions for pregnancy loss and bereaved partners
NLJ this week: AI privilege battles expose risks
Courts are beginning to grapple with whether AI-generated material is legally privileged—and the answers are mixed. In this week's issue of NLJ, Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej of Burges Salmon examine US rulings showing how easily privilege can be lost
NLJ this week: Experts warned—AI use must be transparent
New guidance seeks to bring order to the growing use of artificial intelligence (AI) in expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Minesh Tanna and David Bridge of Simmons & Simmons set out a framework stressing ‘transparency’, ‘explainability’ and ‘reliability’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll