Government ‘showing disregard for the law’, Liberty warns in anti-protest legal challenge

• Home Office continues appeal against Liberty’s successful legal challenge to anti-protest rules, which the High Court had previously found unlawful
• Legislation gave police ‘almost-unlimited’ powers to impose conditions on protests that caused ‘more than minor’ disruption.
• Liberty said “We will ensure a government is not allowed to wilfully ignore the rules at the expense of our fundamental human rights” 

The human rights organisation Liberty has questioned the new Government’s “concerning disregard for the rule of law” as the Home Office has instructed lawyers to proceed with an appeal against a recent High Court ruling that anti-protest legislation had been created unlawfully.

The legislation, which significantly reduced the threshold at which the police could impose almost-unlimited conditions on protests to anything that they deemed caused ‘more than minor disruption’, had been brought in by then Home Secretary Suella Braverman in June 2023. Previously the threshold had been set at anything that caused ‘serious disruption’.

Liberty challenged the legislation in court, arguing that it was unlawful since it had already been democratically rejected by Parliament just a few months earlier, and was subsequently brought in “via the back door” through ‘secondary legislation’, which required less Parliamentary scrutiny and debate.

In May 2024, the High Court agreed with Liberty’s arguments, ruling that “more than minor cannot mean serious”. The Court also found that the Government had failed to undertake a fair consultation period, instead only inviting thoughts from those it knew would be supportive of its proposals, such as the police but not protest groups.

The previous Government had lodged an appeal against the ruling, and despite requesting an adjournment and meeting to discuss the regulations, the new Government has now decided to continue the appeal. The appeal hearing is expected to take place later in the year.

The case continues despite Labour’s Attorney General Richard Hermer KC saying in his opening remarks “looking inwards, we will seek to promote the highest standards in how we legislate – seeking to increase accessibility and certainty in how we make law, including not abusing the use of secondary legislation”.

Hundreds of people have been arrested or convicted under this legislation since it was introduced, most notably the climate activist Greta Thunberg, who was acquitted of all charges in a hearing in February 2024. Liberty has urged the Government to reconsider its decision to appeal, saying that the decision has left many people in limbo awaiting the outcome in an already overcrowded criminal justice system.

Liberty has said that the Court’s ruling in May showed that “a government simply cannot ignore the will of parliament” and “highlights the importance of all of us being able to stand up to those in power where we see injustice.”

Akiko Hart, Liberty’s Director, said:

“We are very disappointed that, despite a positive discussion about the impact of the unlawful regulation, the Home Secretary has taken the decision to continue this case. This legislation is undemocratic, unconstitutional and unacceptable. 

“The Home Office’s decision to continue the case shows disregard for the rule of law and completely goes against previous statements from the Government just last month that they would not abuse the use of secondary legislation and that they would promote high standards of governance.  

“With hundreds of people wrongfully arrested and convicted due to this unlawful legislation already, it is not right to continue to carry on with this law that should never have been made in the first place. The only right thing to do would be to quash this legislation once and for all.” 

Katy Watts, Lawyer at Liberty, said:

“We brought this case to court to defend democracy and to ensure that a government is not allowed to wilfully ignore the rules at the expense of our fundamental human rights. The Home Secretary’s decision to appeal the Court’s decision shows a concerning disregard for the rule of law.” 

“The High Court ruling sent a clear message that legislation cannot be brought in through the back door ignoring the will of Parliament. This legislation was forced through without proper consultation and with Parliament having voted it down just a few months earlier. For us the ruling is clear; Ministers cannot disregard the rule of law to pursue their own agenda.  

“We will continue to challenge this case, defend democracy and stand up to power.” 

Shameem Ahmad, CEO at Public Law Project, said:

“By giving Government ministers the ability to amend Acts of Parliament through statutory instruments, Parliament hands them a significant amount of power. That power must be used with the utmost care and the previous Government fell woefully short of that standard. By deciding to continue with this appeal, this new Government has affirmed its commitment to that excessive and unlawful use of executive power. 

“The Government has missed a critical opportunity to rebalance the relationship between the executive and Parliament, which after years of strain needs urgent attention. It is therefore disappointing that we will need to resort to the courts to continue to defend parliamentary sovereignty and the rule of law. We will continue to support Liberty in its case.”