The New Dark Age

Every time politicians and the police talk about ‘recognising’ the right to protest, they take our rights away.

(more…)

Does the ‘right to protest’ mean legal protections for “peaceful protest”, or “lawful protest”, or only protests that cause no disruption?

You may not know for certain, but you might expect the politicians who make our laws, or who are supposedly responsible for holding the police to account, to know how to answer this question.

In the week when the Supreme Court hears evidence about the banning of the direct action group, Palestine Action, it is worth recalling that Yvette Cooper has often celebrated the legacy of civil disobedience of suffragettes – a recurring example of counter-power – who were repeatedly arrested for causing disruption and criminal damage.

She did so in 2025 by wearing a sash in the colours of the militant Women’s Social and Political Union – on the very day that she banned their twenty-first century successors.

That is why, in the next week, we will launch “The Definition of the Right to Protest” – what campaigners collectively expect and demand from the police when those with power are not listening, and we need, even temporarily, to take disruptive action. As you’re on the Netpol mailing list, you’ll be the first to receive this when it launches next week.

We are tired of asking the state to change when it has consistently shown it has zero interest in doing so. It’s time we took the defence of our right to protest into our own hands. Read more about the campaing before it launches.