Containment tactic ‘broke the law’ rules High Court

The High Court has ruled that the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) broke the law in the way it used the containment tactic and shields against protestors at the G20 demonstrations in central London in 2009, but the force said it will appeal the decision.

The judgement was passed on Thursday (April 14) in which judges found in favour of protestors who had claimed police treated them unfairly during the incident.

Judges were told how officers used punches to the face, slaps and shields against demonstrators whom senior officers accept had nothing to do with violence. The criticism comes on the back of an ongoing inquest into the death of newspaper vendor Ian Tomlinson who died during the demonstrations following contact with MPS officer PC Simon Harwood.

On April 1, 2009, there were several demonstrations in central London, but the court case dealt with the Climate Camp in Bishopsgate. A senior officer accepted it was a peaceful protest but decided it should be contained to avoid potentially violent people joining it, before ordering it to be cleared.

Video clips of the incident showed officers appearing to strike demonstrators, who appeared not to be engaged in any violence. The judgement concluded that an operation by police to push back climate camp protestors was “not necessary or proportionate.”

It said: “There never was a reasonable apprehension of imminent breaches of the peace at the Climate Camp. Mr Fordham [the protestors’ barrister] submits that the defendants’ contention that there were groups within the Climate Camp who were intent on disorder or criminal damage is largely unsupported by the evidence. We think this is correct.”

It added: “The policy and training about the use of shields as it came over to us in the evidence appeared to be insufficient for individual circumstances. There needed to be clear cut instructions as to whether shield strikes were ever justified, and, if so, when.”

The MPS acknowledged that it is “only right” the force is open to legal scrutiny, but it will continue to use containment as a last resort. It added that the Bishopsgate containment prevented further scenes of violence and criminal damage on April 1 and as such will be appealing the high court’s decision.

A spokesperson for the force said: “The judgement recognises the police concerns about the risk of a breach of peace due to protestors from the Royal Exchange trying to join the Bishopsgate demonstration. An earlier demonstration outside the Bank of England saw significant violence against police and damage caused to the Royal Bank of Scotland nearby.

“We have rigorously defended the claims against the MPS because at the heart of this case lies a vital public order policing tactic that prevents disorder and protects the public.”

The statement said the judgment relates to the individual circumstances of April 1, 2009, and not the use of containment at other events. Where necessary, containment will continue to be used as a last resort to prevent serious disorder and violence.

“However, we believe that this issue is so important for the police`s ability to prevent disorder within protest that we will be appealing the Administrative Court`s finding that the containment and pushing operations on the April 1, 2009 in Bishopsgate were not lawful.”