| Act of Parliament | |
 | |
| Long title | Long title An Act to provide for the establishment and functions of theSerious Organised Crime Agency; to make provision about investigations, prosecutions, offenders and witnesses in criminal proceedings and the protection of persons involved in investigations or proceedings; to provide for the implementation of certain international obligations relating to criminal matters; to amend theProceeds of Crime Act 2002; to make further provision for combatting crime and disorder, including new provision about powers of arrest and search warrants and about parental compensation orders; to make further provision about the police and policing and persons supporting the police; to make provision for protecting certain organisations from interference with their activities; to make provision about criminal records; to provide for thePrivate Security Industry Act 2001 to extend to Scotland; and for connected purposes. |
|---|---|
| Citation | 2005 c. 15 |
| Introduced by | David Blunkett,Home Secretary[2] |
| Territorial extent |
|
| Dates | |
| Royal assent | 7 April 2005 |
| Repealed |
|
| Other legislation | |
| Amends | |
| Repeals/revokes | Public Order (Amendment) Act 1996 |
| Amended by |
|
| Repealed by |
|
Status: Partially repealed | |
| Text of statute as originally enacted | |
| Revised text of statute as amended | |
TheSerious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005[1] (c. 15) (often abbreviated toSOCPA orSOCAP) is anAct of theParliament of the United Kingdom aimed primarily at creating theSerious Organised Crime Agency. It also significantly extended and simplified the powers of arrest of aconstable and introduced restrictions on protests in the vicinity of thePalace of Westminster. It was introduced into theHouse of Commons on 24 November 2004 and was passed by Parliament and given royal assent on 7 April 2005.[3]
Measures to introduce a specific offence of "incitement to religious hatred" were included in early drafts of the Act, but then dropped so the bill would pass before the2005 general election. The offence has since been created by theRacial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
The Act applies principally to England and Wales but s.179 permits the extent or designates sections applying only to Scotland and/or Northern Ireland; additionally s.179(9) extends the application of four sections (ss.172, 173, 177, 178) beyond the United Kingdom to theChannel Islands and theIsle of Man.
The Act introduced changes to the powers ofarrest utilised by both "constables" and "other persons" in England and Wales. The termarrestable offence ceased to have effect as, bar a few preserved exemptions, one power of arrest now applies to all offences when the arrest is made by a constable. Where the threshold of an arrestable offence was previously used to enable specific powers of search or powers to delay certain entitlements, these powers are preserved, but the threshold is changed to that of anindictable offence.[4]
Subject to an overriding requirement that an arrest is reasonably required and that no less intrusive way of advancing the investigation is reasonably available (the "Necessity Test"):the constable may arrest without a warrant anyone who is about to or is in the act of committing an offence, or anyone they have reasonable grounds to suspect of committing or being about to commit an offence. They may also arrest anyone they have reasonable grounds to believe is guilty of an offence they suspect has been committed. These powers to arrest only apply if one or more of the following reasons apply:
Given the scope of the last two provisions, a newCode of Practice was issued for guidance.
These changes were enacted on 1 January 2006.
Sections 128–131 criminalisetrespass at certain "protected sites", which consist of nuclear sites and additional sites designated by the Secretary of State. The latter consist of a range of royal, parliamentary, and government sites. Trespass is punishable on summary conviction with a fine and/or imprisonment for up to a year.[5]
In addition to the Protected Sites, the Act is controversial primarily for sections 132 to 138, which restrict the right todemonstrate within a "designated area" of up to onekilometre from any point inParliament Square.[6] Demonstrators must give written notice to theCommissioner of the Metropolitan Police six days in advance, or if this is not reasonably practicable then no less than 24 hours in advance.[7]
The area itself is defined by aStatutory Instrument, the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 (Designated Area) Order 2005, rather than the Act. It specifically excludesTrafalgar Square, a traditional site of protest on the northern boundary of the area. Apart from Parliament it also includesWhitehall,Downing Street,Westminster Abbey, theMiddlesex Guildhall,New Scotland Yard, and theHome Office. It also covers a small section of land on the other bank of theRiver Thames, includingCounty Hall, theJubilee Gardens,St Thomas' Hospital and theLondon Eye.[8]
These provisions of the Act were introduced partially as a result ofBrian Haw and hisParliament Square Peace Campaign. Haw was a peace campaigner, who from 1 June 2001 until his death on 18 June 2011 protested against Britain and the United States' policy towardsIraq.[9] He used placards and a loudspeaker to get his message across, which some British MPs found disruptive.Patrick Cormack MP said in a Parliamentary debate on 7 February 2005 that the lives of "members of staff inPortcullis House and 1 Parliament Street, as well as the police who are on duty at Members' entrance day after day ... are made intolerable by those people baying away, without a crowd to address, merely repeating themselvesad nauseam."[10]
However, others, such asJeremy Corbyn MP disagreed, saying "The Minister should think carefully about removing rights that are enshrined in our history", andGlenda Jackson MP agreed with him, saying "I regard it as the voice of democracy".[10]Lembit Öpik MP drew attention to the comments of the Prime MinisterTony Blair, who, on 7 April 2002, said: "When I pass protestors every day at Downing Street ... I may not like what they call me, but I thank God they can. That's called freedom."[10] The Home Office stated the security concerns, such as the possibility of explosive devices being left in and around Haw's paraphernalia, were another reason for the legislation.[10][11]
The legislation initially appeared ineffective against Haw. TheHigh Court of Justice ruled that as Haw's protest had begun in June 2001 he was not required to get authorisation. The three-strong judicial panel accepted arguments by Haw's lawyers that the law only applied to demonstrations that took place after it came into force, not those previously in progress.[12] However, on 8 May 2006, this decision was overturned by theCourt of Appeal.[9][13]
On 1 August 2005, the day that the Act came into force, theStop the War Coalition and others organised a protest against the prohibition.[14] They did not officially ask for permission, but at the subsequent court cases it was revealed that the Stop the War Coalition had negotiated with police about the protest.[citation needed] The action attracted some 200 people according to reports – among themLauren Booth,Tony Blair's sister-in-law – and five people were arrested.[14]
The first conviction under the Act was in December 2005, whenMaya Evans was convicted for reading the names of British soldiers killed in theIraq War, near theCenotaph in October, without police authorisation.[15]
In 2006, the comedian and political activistMark Thomas attacked this section of the act by organising several protests within the area, within the confines of the law. His most notable was when he organised 21 protests over the course of a single day within the area. This act got Thomas into theGuinness Book of Records for taking part in the most protests in a single day. However, as the first and last protest took place in the same location, only 20 protests are recognised by Guinness.[16][17]
In January 2007Tate Britain openedState Britain, aninstallation by artistMark Wallinger that recreated the display confiscated by the police from Brian Haw's protest. The Tate press release on the exhibition mentioned that the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 prohibited "unauthorised demonstrations within a one kilometre radius of Parliament Square" and that this radius passed through the Duveen Hall, literally bisecting Wallinger's exhibit.[18] Wallinger marked this on the floor with a black line running through the Tate. Press reports dwelt on the potential dangers of this infringement, speculating that the police might even remove the half of the exhibit on the "wrong" side of the line.[19]Charles Thomson of theStuckists art group wrote toThe Guardian, pointing out that the exclusion zone ended at Thorney Street, 300 yards before the Tate.[20]
Gordon Brown said that he planned to look again at this section of the SOCPA,[11] meaning that protesters would eventually be able to protest freely in the kilometre-radius of parliament without prior authorisation being needed. In October 2007, the Home Office published a public consultation document,Managing Protest Around Parliament,[21] which "takes another look at sections 132–138 [of SOCPA] and explores whether there is another way to address the situation that would both uphold the right to protest while also giving police the powers they need to keep the peace".
Sections 132 to 138 of the Act were repealed by thePolice Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, which provides for a different scheme of "prohibited activities" on Parliament Square.
SOCPA also amended theProtection from Harassment Act 1997 so that "pursuing a course of conduct" amounting to harassment could mean approaching two people just once, rather than one person at least twice, as before. Commentators such asGeorge Monbiot have voiced the concern that the amended Harassment Act effectively "allows the police to ban any campaign they please".[22]
