The Gown Student Newspaper at Queen's University Belfast

COMMENT: Why the Public Assemblies Bill is justified

Abraham Lincoln once claimed that “A majority held in restraint by constitutional checks and limitations . . . is the only true sovereign of a free people.” As part of the Hillsborough Agreement, Northern Ireland’s two incumbent political parties agreed to undertake a review of public assemblies, parades and protests. Following months of consultation, 20th April 2010 saw the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister publish their consultation paper. This document included a Bill which they hope will become the new law governing such activities.

BY SEAMUS J. MULHOLLAND

The document proposes that, in the absence of permission sought from and granted by a new statutory agency entitled the Office of Public Assemblies, Parades and Protests (OPAPP), events comprising fifty plus people, will be illegally constituted. Now, a person who wishes to organise an event, must give thirty-seven days’ notice prior to the date on which it is to take place, and then submit to the decision-making powers of the OPAPP regarding whether or not it has the go-ahead.

Peter Robinson MLA and Martin McGuiness MLA are also seeking to supply the OPAPP with an impressive arsenal of legal weaponry to ensure compliance. The primary deterrent will be judicially-issued Prohibition Orders. Moreover, in the face of defiance, “A constable in uniform may arrest without warrant a person whom [they] reasonably suspect has committed an offence under the Act.”

The arrestee will then find themselves in front of a Magistrate facing, upon summary conviction, imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months and/or a fine not exceeding £5,000.

Local civil liberties groups have condemned the Bill as an attack on rights granted by the European Convention of Human Rights, including freedom of expression and the right to peaceable assembly.

The Belfast Telegraph alleges “The Parades Bill takes a detour from simple common sense”. On the contrary, at sixty-seven pages, I find it provides a rationally thought-through statutory basis on which to make difficult decisions regarding public assemblies. Such events, especially in Northern Ireland, cannot be left to some vague notion of “common sense”. The law, as it will be, sets out the process for dialogue where issues arise surrounding a given public assembly. The cost may well be a thirty-seven day delay, but if this protects the fundamental human rights to peaceful lives, whilst ultimately appeasing our qualified rights of assembly and expression, then this is a cost worth paying. Furthermore, it is important to note that it also provides for fast-tracked applications within seventy-two hours where expediency is required in exceptional circumstances.

Student representatives have noted that the Public Assemblies Bill could represent a curb on academic activism. For the aforementioned reasons, and those which will become apparent in the following prose, I find this small apocalyptic warning wholly unfounded.

In fact the Act also makes many further meritorious and progressive initiatives. For instance it provides that organisers of events must “Take account of the local context and, in particular, of any sensitive locations near proposed assemblies, including locations associated with past conflict or previous public disorder”.

Most reasoned minds will recognise the appeal of incorporating this provision. It would be unfair, for example, to allow people to gather in large numbers in residential areas where they are not wanted.

Moreover the Bill goes some way to protecting the freedoms of minority interest groups. Whilst democracy is a fundamental underpinning of our constitution, it is also desirable to avoid situations of ochlocracy – that is majoritarianism – where the person who shouts or protests loudest wins.  It will be an offence “To prevent or disrupt a lawful assembly” or “to harass persons who are taking part in, or endeavouring to take part in, a lawful public assembly.” Punishments for these offences are every bit as prohibitive as those designed to inhibit participation in illegal gatherings – they are the same .This function of the legislation allows all voices, both booming and timid, to be heard.

It is also important to take note that times have changed too. Just as the majority of Northern Irish citizens have demonstrated their preference for political dialogue, as opposed to the physical demonstrations of the past in making progressive strides forward, in reaching comprises in relation to our owned troubled history, can the physicality of demonstrations relating to contemporary issues not be subsumed and distributed by modern mediums? For instance many of my peers in academia will appreciate that media-driven storms can be just as effective as more primitive demonstrations. Take for example last year’s Facebook campaign to support Rage Against the Machine in attaining pole position in the Christmas popular music chart. Did this involve picketing the home of Simon Cowell or HMV stores? No. Power to the People has taken on a new, more civilised form.

Furthermore, in debating the efficacy of the Public Assemblies Bill one must remember that politicians do not sit on-high making law at a whim, after the fashion of an omnipotent monarch. They serve a societal function; they are accountable to their electorate. Recent and recurrent demonstrations, such as the G8 summit in London last summer and, more locally, the annual Orange Order marches at Drumcree, have revealed the need for legislation to regulate public assemblies and processions. The purpose of the regulations from a political perspective are not to stifle freedom of assembly and expression, it simply is to facilitate the need for the State to be organised in its accommodation of mass activities.

So what’s the verdict on the Public Assemblies Bill? Is it an impingement on genuine democratic freedoms or a justified leveller to give all parties their opportunity in the public arena, with the added benefit of allowing the State to maintain public order and security? Having faith in legal process, my mind firmly favours the latter proposition.

Tags: Gown, News, newspaper, Public assemblies, qub, Queen's, queen's university, Seamus J Mulholland, student, students, The Gown

This entry was posted on Wednesday, June 30th, 2010 at 4:17 pm and is filed under Opinion. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.