ID :
165962
Sat, 03/05/2011 - 10:17
Auther :
Shortlink :
https://www.oananews.org//node/165962
The shortlink copeid
UK students seek redress from being 'kettled' by police during protests
London, March 5, IRNA – Two British students have launched legal action against the Metropolitan Police for being “kettled” during protests in December against the government plans to treble university fee to £9,000 a year.
The test case claiming “unlawful imprisonment” was lodged by 17-year-old Rosie Bergonzi from Brighton, southern England, and 18-year-old James Moulding from Reading, west of London, at the High Court in London this week, their solicitors, Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) announced.
“Kettling has become the stock police response to peaceful protest. On December 9, it appears to have been resorted to by default,” said PIL human rights lawyers Phil Shiner.
“The chilling effect upon the democratic right to peaceful protest has been recognised by the Metropolitan Police, and the lengthy deprivation of liberty to which my clients were subjected is wholly unacceptable,” Shiner said in a statement obtained by IRNA.
The two protesters said that they were seeking damages under the Human Rights Act 1998 after being 'kettled' with many thousands of other students inside police cordons for over 11 hours outside parliament, without food or water or access to toilet facilities.
“Kettling is a clear infringement of the fundamental right to peaceful protest. It is a form of collective punishment and a dangerous and a lazy policing tactic that simply does not belong in a modern democracy,” said Moulding.
“The police response to the student protest was completely out of proportion. Being forced to stand with no food, water or toilet facilities for such a prolonged period was not something I deserved for attempting to make a peaceful protest,” Bergonzi stated.
The claimants allege breaches of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, including their right not to be deprived arbitrarily of their liberty, the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of assembly.
The case is the latest action taken by PIL on behalf of individuals seeking to challenge the legality of the coalition government’s series of cuts and include leading judicial reviews in relation to library closures and to the increase in tuition fees itself./end
The test case claiming “unlawful imprisonment” was lodged by 17-year-old Rosie Bergonzi from Brighton, southern England, and 18-year-old James Moulding from Reading, west of London, at the High Court in London this week, their solicitors, Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) announced.
“Kettling has become the stock police response to peaceful protest. On December 9, it appears to have been resorted to by default,” said PIL human rights lawyers Phil Shiner.
“The chilling effect upon the democratic right to peaceful protest has been recognised by the Metropolitan Police, and the lengthy deprivation of liberty to which my clients were subjected is wholly unacceptable,” Shiner said in a statement obtained by IRNA.
The two protesters said that they were seeking damages under the Human Rights Act 1998 after being 'kettled' with many thousands of other students inside police cordons for over 11 hours outside parliament, without food or water or access to toilet facilities.
“Kettling is a clear infringement of the fundamental right to peaceful protest. It is a form of collective punishment and a dangerous and a lazy policing tactic that simply does not belong in a modern democracy,” said Moulding.
“The police response to the student protest was completely out of proportion. Being forced to stand with no food, water or toilet facilities for such a prolonged period was not something I deserved for attempting to make a peaceful protest,” Bergonzi stated.
The claimants allege breaches of their rights under the European Convention on Human Rights, including their right not to be deprived arbitrarily of their liberty, the right to freedom of expression and the right to freedom of assembly.
The case is the latest action taken by PIL on behalf of individuals seeking to challenge the legality of the coalition government’s series of cuts and include leading judicial reviews in relation to library closures and to the increase in tuition fees itself./end
