Not sure on what basis Republic are seeking this meeting – have they been appointed representative for the arrested individuals?

If there was a miscarriage of justice here (wrongful arrest) the individuals in question should bring a case forward. If it was within the law, then it is simply (ha ha) a case of getting the law changed to guarantee the right to protest.

And if there was an actual crime being planned which was averted, this whole story will presumably go away.

So the rule of law will still work then. Civilisation hasn’t collapsed and we still have the structures within which the machinery of the state can be challenged.

Not as bad as previously suggested then.

@1 watchman

I assume that as an organisation representing those in favour of abolishing the monarchy, and replacing it with a republic, they are somewhat concerned at the perceived heavy handedness of the police actions, and want to know more?

It certainly seemd from what the female police officer said on TV prior to the wedding, that they had decided that they would not tolerate any protest; you may feel sanguine about the police making that kind of decision, but I’m not sure I am at all. I hope Republic do get some meaningful answers, and clarifications of how and why the police took the actions they did.

Watchman,

on what basis Republic are seeking this meeting?

“We will be staging stunts and protests in the year of the jubilee and we need to know that the police will allow those protests to go ahead.”

Or to put it another way, one ought to be to be able to seek clarification of the police’s approach to the law without having to be arrested.

Galen10,

I am not sanguine about the police deciding anything to do with freedom of speech (albeit I would have accepted them stopping protests that disrupted the actual ceremony or procession). As far as I can see, what was done was wrong, and basically broke the key subtext of freedom of speech – you have no right not to be offended as a result.

My concern is simply a campaign group to which we have no evidence (presented) that any of those arrested are affiliated purporting to act on their behalf. If the unelected and unresponsive police should not be able to make decisions about what is acceptable, how comes an unelected and unresponsive campaign group can decide it speaks for others? I believe in individual freedoms – a campaign group is no more about these than the police (both might claim to defend them, with some justification; both are also threats).

I also believe this is an issue too important for it to become marginalised as a ‘republican’ issue: campaign groups can, by appropriating issues to themselves, do great harm. Republic has a valid political position, and if there was consistent anti-republican use of the law then it might be relevant. As it is, I am worried this is simply self-promotion for one (relatively minor in my view) political cause by hitching it to a much more important issue. Clearly Republic might disagree, but they have different priorities than me – me, I prefer to know I have freedom of speech and protest (not that I’m likely to bother…) ahead of worrying about the ceremonial/safeguard at the head of the state.

how comes an unelected and unresponsive campaign group can decide it speaks for others?

In what sense has it done so?

I can understand preventing protest on the main route (weighing the competing interests of the protesters and the people interested in watching the wedding procession), but the Soho Square and Holborn and other off-route sing-songs, parties and protests should not have been interfered with ISTM.

“I can understand preventing protest on the main route” – saying that, this fails the Town Square Test somewhat.

“I can understand preventing protest on the main route” – saying that, this fails the Town Square Test somewhat.

Probably – but for the sake of sanity (and for the couple getting married) it would be better.

But last time I checked neither Holborn nor Soho was relevant, so unless there is something we have not been told, this looks like a priori abuse of police power (every time I say something like that new details emerge…).

A very sad state of affairs. All I can say is that no innocent person should be subject to treatment like that and I hope that as more people speak out and stand up for their rights, the police will be forced to change their behaviour. I do not appreciate being treated like a criminal when the police know full well that I am innocent.

I forgot to add; as someone who was detained that day who was on his way to meet with fellow republicans in Holburn, I fully support the campaign group Republic and am grateful for their help.