The Law Games: Cycling is a crime!

For the latest instalment of #TheLawGames, an interesting video from the Critical Mass demonstrations that took place in London on Friday. An unidentified woman encounters an officer, identified in the video as Sargent Sefer, as members of the Ride explain to the officer that a man being detained off camera needs water to deal with the effects of a 19 hr cycle during Ramadan.

In an exchange that will do little to improve the already battered reputation of the Met Police after the renewed controversy over paying police for information and ongoing allegations of institutional racism, the officer bluntly dismisses the female cyclist. Comfortingly, he explains he does know the law and "could quote PACE to you [and] could quote cases" but then declines the chance to demonstrate that knowledge and instead tell the woman that she will be arrested for breaching s12 of the Public Order Act 1986  - failing to comply with the conditions under which the Ride was allowed to take place. That section creates two offences, making an organiser and a participant each potentially liable for a failure to comply with conditions.

The "organiser" provisions of the Act are interesting because there is a debate to be had as to whether or not a procession of the nature of the Critical Mass demo is legally capable of having an organiser, but I'll leave that point for a later post. It is not clear whether the cyclist was indeed one of the 130 people arrested or not. A more immediate question is why, if the officer was satisfied that an offence had been committed, he did not arrest the cyclist at that point. Also, why he is prepared to wait for another officer to do so and why does the threat only come after his authority is challenged?

While the officer is right that the care of an arrested person becomes the responsibility of the police, it is also clear from PACE that an officer should be prepared to be challenged in the exercise of his powers and that he or she should be able to explain the legal basis on which those powers are used - that is the whole point of the PACE regime. A club-fisted approach to policing inspires neither the respect nor the confidence of the public at large. Officers should embrace a sense of transparency and reasoned engagement with the public. It is as important for protecting them in their work as it is for the public in their ability to resist the perceived excesses of coercive power. In the context of free-speech and the right to protest, these considerations can only grow in importance.

Twitter: @MEtienne12 #TheLawGames