Martyn’s Law should not be used as an excuse to stifle protests, peers have heard.
Lord Murray of Blidworth urged ministers to clarify that protest events are not covered in the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill, which will compel events venues with a capacity of more than 200 people to plan for an attack on their premises.
But Home Office minister Lord Hanson of Flint said the proposed new law – tabled in response to the Manchester Arena bombing at the end of an Ariana Grande concert in May 2017 – is in line with the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
There is a risk that these measures might be used to curtail protest or have the unintentional consequence of curtailing the democratic right to protest
“There is a risk that these measures might be used to curtail protest or have the unintentional consequence of curtailing the democratic right to protest,” Lord Murray warned.
If the Government-backed Bill becomes law, paid-for, ticketed or members-only event organisers will have to invest in, document and review “public protection measures” or face penalties from the Security Industry Authority (SIA).
Conservative former Home Office minister Lord Murray proposed an amendment to the Bill which set out the proposed new law “shall not be used to impede, restrict or unlawfully interfere with the right of individuals to express dissent through peaceful means”.
He said: “Quite frequently, political gatherings happen in members of Parliament’s constituencies of more than 200 people and quite often there’s a local issue or indeed a national issue that encourages public engagement.”
Reform UK peer Baroness Fox of Buckley warned that a farmers’ protest in a barn might fall into the definition of a “qualifying event”, adding: “There is something in this.”
In his response, Lord Hanson said: “Whilst my demo days have gone for the moment, because as a Government minister, I support Government policy, there may be occasions in the future I want to go on further demonstrations.
“And I don’t anticipate this Bill or any other legislation – apart from maybe the legislation that was put in place by the previous government – curtailing that right to have that democratic right to protest as a whole.”
He held up a copy of the Bill and pointed to the front, which bears his name next to a declaration that the proposed law is compatible with the ECHR.
Lord Murray withdrew his proposed amendment after Lord Hanson said the proposals “appropriately and proportionately captures the places and requirements of qualifying premises and events”.
