Mediaboss Marketing

Police surround Parliament Square as protesters from the Occupy group hold a demonstration outside the Houses of Parliament. Photograph: Anthony Devlin/PA Wire/Press Association Images

Boris Johnson has been accused of using Parliament Square as his private back garden in an attempt to crush the fledgling Occupy Democracy movement.

Lawyers have written to Londons mayor threatening legal action after he sanctioned the construction of unlawful fences around the square, which campaigners claim are a deliberate attempt to stop them protesting peacefully. Parliament Square is considered to be one of the most important sites in the country for demonstrators and is maintained by Johnsons Greater London Authority (GLA). Protesters argue that the square was conceived as a place for public meetings, focusing particularly on issues that they believe are being ignored by MPs.

However, four days into a planned 10-day protest last October by Occupy Democracy, a new incarnation of Occupy London, large fences appeared on the square, squeezing protesters on to a narrow strip of grass away from parliament. Lawyers for the human rights group Liberty have written to Johnson warning that if he does not accept the fence is illegal, the GLA faces a judicial review.

Rosie Brighouse, Libertys legal officer, said: Peaceful protest in the UK has a long, proud history. Many of the freedoms we enjoy were won because people were prepared to demonstrate. Parliament Square is not the mayors private back garden. He has a duty to facilitate this political activity, not prevent it especially in the very heart of the worlds oldest democracy.

The GLA says that the Occupy demonstrations were unauthorised because protesters did not try to contact City Hall, although legal papers indicate that Scotland Yard knew of the protests in advance.

Meanwhile, a freedom of information request has revealed that 250,000 was spent on policing the October protests, with more than 500 officers deployed on one day. At one point witnesses counted 140 officers trying to confiscate a piece of tarpaulin that 30 people were sitting on, compounding claims that the Mets response was heavy-handed.

The legal threat is issued on behalf of a social justice campaigner, George Barda, 38, who argues that his right to protest was compromised by the fence. He said: The 1% have conspired to crush a crucial and legitimate democratic movement because they know it resonates with the majority of people.

The judicial review will be a litmus test for whether the courts are also captured by these same powerful interests or whether they do the right thing and hold accountable the GLA and protect our right to peaceful assembly.

A letter from lawyers to City Hall states: It is suspected that the decision to erect the fencing was made for the sole or primary purpose of preventing Occupy Democracy from holding any demonstration on PSG [Parliament Square Garden]. The GLA say the fence was erected to protect the squares grass.

Visit link:
Parliament Square fence crushes protest rights, says Occupy Democracy