2 Public order policing under the spotlight
The police have a range of powers in relation to public order. For most of the twenty-first century, these powers were set out in the Public Order Act (1986), which gave police the power to impose conditions on public assemblies, and defined riot, violent disorder and affray. In 2022, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act introduced further police powers in relation to ‘unacceptable’ protests.
Such police powers have at times been controversial. Their use illustrates the balance the police must strike between facilitating peaceful democratic protest and intervening decisively to stop violent disorder breaking out (or dealing with it forcefully when it does). Given the inherent unpredictability of large-scale, public order situations it is not surprising that police forces can feel caught in the middle of competing expectations and demands.
Figure 3: Protesters attack a bank during the 2009 G20 protests in London [Description: Photograph of London city centre street with crowd; a man in a green hoody and black trousers is kicking at a large plate glass window whilst others watch. The window has graffiti sprayed on it.] Source: https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/protestors-smash-the-windows-of-a-royal-bank-of-scotland-news-photo/1252000796?adppopup=true
In some situations, the police have been criticised for intervening too soon or too forcefully. In 2009, for example, protests around the G20 summit in London led to confrontations between the police and demonstrators. Skirmishes took place between police and protesters and a branch of the Royal Bank of Scotland was attacked (see Figure 3). Ian Tomlinson, a newspaper seller uninvolved in the protests, was struck by a riot officer, collapsing and dying shortly afterwards. Police ‘kettled’ the camp (barring access in or out for around 5,000 protestors) and moved to clear it later in the day.
Protesters later complained about police violence during the kettling process, and a subsequent court case criticised the police for their tactics finding that:
… there was never a reasonable apprehension of imminent breaches of the peace at the Climate Camp’ and that the police operation was ‘not necessary or proportionate’.
A police officer was charged with Ian Tomlinson’s manslaughter but was later acquitted. However, video released of the incident generated further criticism of police tactics.
At other times, the police have been criticised for not acting decisively or forcefully enough. Riot and arson broke out in Harehills (Leeds) in July 2024, when some members of the community reacted adversely to the way social services and police had taken children from a Roma family into care. Although on a much smaller scale than the 2009 riots, several hundred people were involved, police were attacked, fires were started and a bus burned out.
Having judged their presence was inflaming the situation, in this instance the police withdrew from the area. Some residents, however, felt:
… we got failed by the police. The police made a poor decision to retreat and leave the community to basically rot.
A newspaper editorial headline in The Telegraph read:
The police have lost control. Welcome to the era of mob rule.
The comparison between these 2009 and 2024 events shows that the police can be criticised both for forceful, early intervention and for a lack of decisive, early intervention.
The next sections will consider how public order policing has been undertaken in the past. How interventionist and forceful have the police tended to be in past riot situations, and what might we learn from this history?