Anti-Protest Powers Threaten Rights in England and Wales

Published: 12 January 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Civil society groups have strongly condemned the government’s plans to introduce anti-protest powers, warning that these proposals threaten the democratic right to assemble and express dissent. More than 40 organisations, including the TUC, Amnesty International UK, Greenpeace, Liberty, and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, have united to challenge amendments in the crime and policing bill, which would require police to consider the cumulative impact of repeated protests when imposing restrictions. Campaigners argue that this measure represents a dangerous expansion of police authority.

In their joint statement, the groups emphasised that the bill’s wording leaves the definition of “area” vague, meaning police could impose conditions on protests without regard for whether demonstrations share the same purpose or involve the same participants. The organisations warned that the new powers could inadvertently block unrelated marches, potentially restricting anti-racist, climate, or LGBTQ+ protests because of previous demonstrations in the same location. They described these proposals as a draconian attempt to curb freedoms traditionally protected in the UK.

The government has defended the proposal, arguing that repeated large-scale demonstrations, particularly regarding Gaza, have caused concern for local communities, including Jewish residents, following a deadly attack on a Manchester synagogue. Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood stated that the changes aim to reduce repeated disruptions while still allowing peaceful protest. However, critics insist that the government’s focus on policing rather than addressing the issues behind protests risks undermining public trust and democratic accountability.

Ben Jamal, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, condemned the move, arguing that successive governments have consistently responded to public demonstrations with repression instead of engaging with the underlying concerns. He highlighted that protests, especially those supported by widespread public opinion, remain a critical channel for expressing political and social dissent. Jamal insisted that undermining the right to protest could set a dangerous precedent for civil liberties in the UK.

The joint statement, also signed by faith organisations, climate justice groups, trade unions, charities, and NGOs, stressed the historical significance of sustained activism. Campaigns such as the suffragette movement, the civil rights movement, and the anti-apartheid struggle relied on repeated, cumulative demonstrations to achieve change. Liberty’s policy and campaigns officer, Lyle Barker, stated that introducing new anti-protest powers before reviewing existing legislation risks eroding essential human rights protections.

Paul Nowak, general secretary of the TUC, echoed these concerns, noting that restrictions on protest are particularly alarming given the rising influence of far-right movements in the UK and globally. He emphasised that defending democratic norms and basic human rights requires vigilance, especially when legislative proposals threaten long-established freedoms.

Civil society groups have urged the government to abandon the proposed measures entirely, warning that the changes could undermine the UK’s reputation for democratic accountability. They highlighted that limiting the right to protest risks silencing communities advocating for social justice, climate action, and international human rights, including movements expressing solidarity with Palestine. The groups emphasised that any attempt to curtail these rights could face widespread opposition and legal challenges.

The Home Office responded by reiterating that peaceful demonstrations remain protected under UK law and that the proposed powers aim only to prevent repeated disruption, not to suppress lawful protest. Officials stated that communities deserve protection from repeated disturbances while maintaining the fundamental democratic right to demonstrate. Critics, however, argue that such reassurances fail to address the broader consequences of expanding police authority and restricting political expression.

Observers warn that if passed, the anti-protest powers could create a chilling effect on activism across the country, limiting the ability of civil society groups to hold the government accountable. The debate highlights a fundamental tension between maintaining public order and protecting democratic freedoms. Campaigners insist that any legislative changes must be carefully scrutinised to ensure that they do not erode civil liberties or undermine the UK’s democratic tradition.

The discussion over anti-protest powers also intersects with wider questions about the government’s approach to public dissent and its responsibilities under international human rights standards. Legal experts note that excessive restrictions on demonstrations could conflict with the UK’s commitments to international conventions protecting freedom of expression and assembly. Civil society groups argue that these measures could disproportionately impact grassroots movements and marginalised communities advocating for justice and equality.

As scrutiny continues, campaigners are calling on Parliament to prioritise democratic principles and reject measures that could curtail protest rights. The coalition of organisations emphasises that meaningful change historically emerges through repeated, sustained activism, and any attempt to limit this process undermines fundamental democratic engagement. The issue is expected to remain a point of contention in political debates, public discourse, and legal analyses in the coming months.

Check our latest news