Share this post:
Labour’s leaders may have wanted to deliver spectacle at their conference in Liverpool – but one element was downright shocking.
I refer to the arrest of 66 protesters – many of them pensioners – simply for expressing the belief that activists the government proscribed (apparently for the sake of convenience) are not terrorists.
The police were following instructions. The responsibility lies squarely with the government, whose decision to proscribe the group is now forcing officers to target ordinary citizens who pose no threat.
Never miss a Vox Political post!
Social media algorithms often hide what you want to read. If you’d like to get every article directly, here are your options:
RSS Feed – instant updates, no filters:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/get-every-vox-political-post-no-algorithms-no-blocks/
Mailing List – updates delivered to your inbox:
https://voxpoliticalonline.com/join-the-vox-political-mailing-list/
Video Mailing List – updates go straight to your inbox:
https://dashboard.mailerlite.com/forms/1503041/155584006128141972/share
Discord Server – direct updates, discussion and campaigns
https://discord.gg/SMCRE39XGm
Telegram Channel – every post, direct to your phone:
https://t.co/be9EMGHXFV
Many of those arrested would be physically incapable of carrying out any acts of terrorism — yet they were hauled into custody for their beliefs alone.
(Well… “hauled” is probably overstating it. This Writer has seen photographs of officers holding the hands of elderly protesters as they were taken away, prompting me to ask: what threat do these people actually pose?)
This is not only disproportionate; it is undermining trust in the police.
Officers are caught in a bind, expected to enforce laws that criminalise thought and expression rather than conduct. Many may well believe this is a step too far, even as they are duty-bound to take it.
The spectacle of pensioners being handcuffed and taken away sends a chilling message: dissent is dangerous, even if it is entirely peaceful.
Legal experts warn that such enforcement stretches the limits of civil liberties.
By arresting people for supporting a proscribed group in principle — rather than committing any criminal act — the government risks turning law enforcement into a political instrument.
The government’s role is unmistakable. Proscription is a political tool; enforcement against harmless supporters is its consequence.
By demanding that the police act against citizens simply for expressing an opinion, ministers are undermining the rule of law itself.
Sure, the government may say (and has, in fact, done so) that because Palestine Action are proscribed as terrorists, its supporters are supporting terrorism.
But nobody believes that Palestine Action really is a terrorist organisation. This Writer doesn’t even think anyone in the government does. There is an ongoing court case to decide the issue, with the Court of Appeal set to make a decision next month (October 2025).
In the meantime, the human cost is real.
Families watching from the sidelines witnessed their elderly relatives and friends being handcuffed for holding placards or speaking to journalists — acts that in any democratic society should be protected – not proscribed.
When government policy forces the police to target ordinary citizens, public trust in both institutions suffers.
People start to fear expressing their views, even on non-violent matters. The government has not just criminalised thought; it has placed the police in an impossible position, compromising their legitimacy in the eyes of the public.
This heavy-handed enforcement in the name of counter-terrorism has backfired, politically and socially.
Arresting peaceful supporters of Palestine Action does nothing to prevent violence but achieves maximum damage to confidence in law enforcement.
Ministers may argue they are upholding the law.
But in reality, they are using the law as a blunt instrument to suppress dissent, eroding the democratic freedoms the police are expected to protect.
The 66 arrests in Liverpool are a striking example of what happens when government overreach meets public conscience.
The police do what they are told, but the blame belongs to those who command them to act against ordinary citizens.
If the government continues down this path, it risks not only its credibility but also the trust and legitimacy of the UK’s police.
Labour representatives undoubtedly wants its conference to present the party as a custodian of democracy in the face of anti-democratic forces.
But democracy relies on public faith in the law — and that faith was shattered in front of their eyes.
Share this post:
Like this:
Like Loading...
Labour’s arrests of peaceful protesters are undermining trust in the police
Share this post:
Labour’s leaders may have wanted to deliver spectacle at their conference in Liverpool – but one element was downright shocking.
I refer to the arrest of 66 protesters – many of them pensioners – simply for expressing the belief that activists the government proscribed (apparently for the sake of convenience) are not terrorists.
The police were following instructions. The responsibility lies squarely with the government, whose decision to proscribe the group is now forcing officers to target ordinary citizens who pose no threat.
Many of those arrested would be physically incapable of carrying out any acts of terrorism — yet they were hauled into custody for their beliefs alone.
(Well… “hauled” is probably overstating it. This Writer has seen photographs of officers holding the hands of elderly protesters as they were taken away, prompting me to ask: what threat do these people actually pose?)
This is not only disproportionate; it is undermining trust in the police.
Officers are caught in a bind, expected to enforce laws that criminalise thought and expression rather than conduct. Many may well believe this is a step too far, even as they are duty-bound to take it.
The spectacle of pensioners being handcuffed and taken away sends a chilling message: dissent is dangerous, even if it is entirely peaceful.
Legal experts warn that such enforcement stretches the limits of civil liberties.
By arresting people for supporting a proscribed group in principle — rather than committing any criminal act — the government risks turning law enforcement into a political instrument.
The government’s role is unmistakable. Proscription is a political tool; enforcement against harmless supporters is its consequence.
By demanding that the police act against citizens simply for expressing an opinion, ministers are undermining the rule of law itself.
Sure, the government may say (and has, in fact, done so) that because Palestine Action are proscribed as terrorists, its supporters are supporting terrorism.
But nobody believes that Palestine Action really is a terrorist organisation. This Writer doesn’t even think anyone in the government does. There is an ongoing court case to decide the issue, with the Court of Appeal set to make a decision next month (October 2025).
In the meantime, the human cost is real.
Families watching from the sidelines witnessed their elderly relatives and friends being handcuffed for holding placards or speaking to journalists — acts that in any democratic society should be protected – not proscribed.
When government policy forces the police to target ordinary citizens, public trust in both institutions suffers.
People start to fear expressing their views, even on non-violent matters. The government has not just criminalised thought; it has placed the police in an impossible position, compromising their legitimacy in the eyes of the public.
This heavy-handed enforcement in the name of counter-terrorism has backfired, politically and socially.
Arresting peaceful supporters of Palestine Action does nothing to prevent violence but achieves maximum damage to confidence in law enforcement.
Ministers may argue they are upholding the law.
But in reality, they are using the law as a blunt instrument to suppress dissent, eroding the democratic freedoms the police are expected to protect.
The 66 arrests in Liverpool are a striking example of what happens when government overreach meets public conscience.
The police do what they are told, but the blame belongs to those who command them to act against ordinary citizens.
If the government continues down this path, it risks not only its credibility but also the trust and legitimacy of the UK’s police.
Labour representatives undoubtedly wants its conference to present the party as a custodian of democracy in the face of anti-democratic forces.
But democracy relies on public faith in the law — and that faith was shattered in front of their eyes.
Share this post:
Like this:
you might also like
Police State Britain: Tories would arrest you for looking at them in a funny way
Like this:
Foiled! Lords veto Coalition bid to make being ‘annoying’ an arrestable offence
Like this:
Plebgate v NHS lies – why is one the lead on the news when the other was buried?
Like this:
Like this: