London – British lawmakers on Tuesday evening allowed a controversial new police bill, which critics say would reduce the public’s right to protest, to move on to the next stage of parliamentary debate. The “Bill on Police, Crime, Conviction and Courts” has become the focal point of demonstrations in London after officers used heavy methods to break a vigil for Sarah Everard, a 33-year-old woman who was murdered last week while walking home at night.
The man accused of killing Everard is a police officer on duty.
Protesters gathered in front of the House of Commons as Parliament debated on Tuesday, chanting “Kill the bill.”
“It is not enough to say that the police do not protect us. We must say loud and clear that the police are the cause, not the solution, of the racist and sexist violence we live in,” said an organizer of the protest in the crowd gathered in London’s Parliament Square during the fourth day of protests in the city.
“This is for Sarah and all the other women,” said Ngozi Fulani, who heads London’s domestic violence charity Sistah Space. “Sandra Bland, Breonna Taylor, Blessing, whether they’re in America or around here, brutality is brutality.”
The police bill
The “Police, Crime, Conviction and Courts Bill” would give police additional powers to reduce protests, including imposing start and end times on static demonstrations, as well as limiting the noise that authorities consider causing “intimidation or harassment.”
“The loose and lazy way of drafting this legislation would make the dictator blush,” MP Gavin Robinson said during the debate ahead of Tuesday’s vote. “The protests will be noisy, the protests will be disrupted and no matter how offensive we may find the issue at heart, the right to protest must be protected.”
Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick said in a statement that she wanted to reform police powers following last April’s Extinction Rebellion climate change demonstrations, “specifically to address protests where people are not primarily violent or severely disordered, but, as in this case, had a stated statement. ” with the intention of putting the police on their knees and stopping the city. “
The bill would also be an offense for a protest to block traffic entrances in Parliament, effectively limiting the public’s right to protest outside the UK government headquarters.
After the harsh police on the eve in honor of Sarah Everard on Saturday night, and given that the man accused of killing Everard is a police officer, critics have said that in addition to raising liberty issues civilians, would increase the police powers will do nothing to address the problem of violence against women.
“We are fed up with male violence, whether at the hands of the state, our partners, our relatives or strangers,” MP Nadia Whittome said during Tuesday’s debate. Explaining that he had taken part in the protests against Saturday’s surveillance by Everard and the bill, he added: “We are leaving because some people do not survive male violence.”
Widespread opposition
More than 150 organizations, including human and religious rights groups and unions, on Monday sent an open letter to British Home Secretary Priti Patel, who oversees law enforcement in the UK, urging her to reconsider the legislation. .
They argued that the bill, which was only published for public scrutiny about a week ago, “is being rushed by parliament during a pandemic and before civil society and citizens have been able to fully understand its profound implications.” .
HANNAH MCKAY / REUTERS
“For a country that so often prides itself on civil liberties, this bill represents an attack on some of the most fundamental rights of citizens, particularly those of marginalized communities, and is being pushed at once and in a way. than those who will be subject to their provisions who are less able to respond, ”the letter says.
The British opposition Labor Party, which would initially abstain from voting, announced on Sunday that its lawmakers would vote against the bill. Still on Tuesday, the bill moved on to the next phase of debate.
On Monday, in response to Everard’s assassination, Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a separate plan to combat violence against women by increasing CCTV coverage and street lighting and patrolling police officers more covert in bars and clubs when allowed to reopen. .
But protesters argued that while television and lighting may be beneficial, especially in light of the Everard case, more police with more powers will not address the root of the problem.
“We don’t just want more police and more police officers abusing their powers against women. We want real actions,” Jennifer, 25, said during Monday’s rally. “We want money to be spent on services to women. We want there to be a cultural change that protects women and fights against misogyny and violence.”
“They are taking control of us. I know my generation doesn’t want it,” said 19-year-old Nancy, who was protesting in front of Parliament on Tuesday evening. She pledged to continue protesting against the bill, despite the potential increase in police powers.
“People are afraid of being called radical or crazy or sensitive, but especially with women, we do everything we can and go home with friends, call our boyfriends and keep the keys between our fingers, so that it’s all we do they’re gone now. “