Uncorrected oral evidence: Security, safety and protest: the role of human rights, HC 163
Oral evidence, 1 July 2026.
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
There is a live example that Clair can provide of the difficulties that the Metropolitan Police had to manage in a recent event and the way that they involved criminal justice partners to be able to navigate some of that difficult territory, and then I was able to get that communication out across the country as well.
Chair
Chief Superintendent Haynes, I think the ball is yours.
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
I think the example that the chief is referring to is the recent event in London on 16 May, which I am sure you will have seen and heard about, in relation to two very opposing groups in the centre of London. There were two large-scale demonstrations with opposing views, both potentially with views that were in opposition to the wider community and so could have an impact. Our job is to manage that, as we have discussed here, balancing the rights of people to lawfully protest and looking at what is perhaps grossly offensive versus what is an offence, so where a criminal offence might be committed. We use the powers available to us to intervene in those instances; that comes back to the training and understanding the framework and the legislation that we are working in. As we know, the threshold for arrest is different from the threshold for prosecution. Officers used those powers and we made around 40 arrests that day, 20 of which were for hate crimes. That was officers being proactive and robust in using the legislation. You will know the difficulty that officers face when they are standing in a very dense crowd and seeing or hearing some of those chants and slogans. We also know the impact that social media has and we saw it on that day, with many of those slogans and chants being repeated on social media, so then we are looking to pursue those individuals who are committing crimes online, some of which are being utilised in the way that we have discussed around information disorder. So, in terms of a difficult and complex situation for our officers, I officers, that is a clear example of how we have had to balance the democratic right to protest—what our communities feel is offensive to them versus what is a criminal offence, and how we balance the needs of the community with the needs of those protesting in order to maintain and keep the peace across London. I think we managed to do that on that day effectively.
Peter Swallow
There are those who see the way that the police respond to situations like that—including, it has to be said, senior politicians who have significant roles in this place—and claim that it is two-tier policing. Do you accept that criticism?
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
No, I do not accept that criticism. From my perspective, it does not reflect how officers make their operational decisions. We police without fear or favour. We make decisions based on threat, risk and harm from intelligence, an evidence base or community impact. We do not make those decisions based on ideology, cause or ethnicity. We encourage our officers to police to the law and use the legislation. I think sometimes that two-tier narrative is perpetuated by those in the public eye versus media versus protest organisers, who all have perhaps a different agenda from that of policing. I reject that suggestion and very much believe that we police without fear or favour.
Alex Sobel
We have this very difficult issue around policing Palestine protests where—I want to be careful here—people may use phrases similar to the name of a group that is proscribed. I want to know how you judge how to police those and when to make arrests. That is probably one for Chief Superintendent Haynes as it is mainly a Metropolitan Police issue.
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
We need to be clear about Palestine Action versus other groups that protest under the banner of Palestine Coalition or Palestine Solidarity Campaign, or offshoots of a variety of Palestinian causes. As we have mentioned before, it is policing’s job to enforce the law. We do not make the law. Palestine Action as a group are a proscribed organisation so, in terms of people coming out in the streets of London, as we have seen over the last few months, and committing offences by supporting a proscribed organisation, you will have seen policing step forward in London and making arrests. That talks to the capacity and capability concerns. We in London, as the largest force, have the ability to step in and make large-scale arrests, but that comes at a cost because every officer we bring into London is an officer we are taking out of the neighbourhood or away from front-line policing. Every colleague who we bring in from around the country is an officer who we are taking away from their communities. So we will always do our best to enforce the law. We will look generally at the protest in front of us and make arrests to the capacity and capability that we have, and then take those arrests through to prosecution where it is possible and practical.
Afzal Khan
Building on this discussion, what is the police response to demonstrations that may be non-violent and non-criminal but are nevertheless experienced as intimidating by certain groups? Can imposing conditions on protests address these concerns without undermining the right to protest for the protesters?
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
It is really difficult to give an assurance that powers and legislation are used consistently across the country. I do not say that lightly, so I shall explain the reason why. You have heard from all of us today that the communities that we police are very different. We deal with many different groups and complex communities, and we all face different challenges when it comes to threat, harm and risk. A key thing that we all do consistently is make sure that we engage with communities, understand their concerns and listen to them so that their voices are heard and we can act accordingly. In order to do that, we need to make sure that commanders—public order commanders at every level—consistently apply the framework of the legislation and the guidance that is available to them. We have seen the use of conditions in the capital, in London, put to good effect. They have helped policing but they have also helped our core purpose of keeping people safe, recognising that it is challenging. When we are policing protests, we have to have a graduated response because within the protest itself there will be different groups and different voices, and we need to make sure that we can respond appropriately.
Assistant Chief Constable Jennifer Wilson
Building on what Claire has just said, within Merseyside we use those conditions under Sections 12 and 14 quite sparingly. We have used them in an exceptionally small number of scenarios and often the higher-risk protest environments that have brought significant disruption. While there are considerations about the pre-emptive use of those conditions, it is important that commanders are able to evidence what is happening there and then to justify the use of those powers. A key part of that is effective community engagement beforehand and understanding what a state of normality would look like for that community. I know we have spoken about the conditions. While obviously they are an option, they are impactive. Again, it is the balancing act between respecting the right to peaceful protest versus respecting the right of others to go about their ordinary everyday business. From a resource perspective, if you impose conditions, you absolutely have to be in a position to police those conditions effectively. The fact that they are there does not mean that they should or will be used, and they are used sparingly here in Merseyside.
Alex Sobel
When protest groups seek permission to march past places of worship, it is not unusual for the worshippers to find that those groups can be intimidating. When you go through a process of considering routes, how do you judge those concerns in particular, which usually are vocalised well in advance of the demonstration taking place? Assistant Chief Constable Armes, this may be one for you.
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
I really do not want to sound negative but I do not want to paint a picture where there is a lack of consistency, because we are consistent in a number of things that we do in policing. Despite the large number of protests that we see, not just in the capital but elsewhere, we have to ensure that each and every single one is assessed and policed according to any threat or risk that is posed. We will always seek to listen to the voice of the community to understand the challenges, and to make sure that we do that in equal measure to everyone who wants to be heard. There are times when we may not get that right because we may not have listened to someone or heard them. We do our very best to make sure that we are able to, but all of us in this Room will have seen played out on social media the challenges that we face in those dynamic situations. I come back to the point about making sure that commanders are trained, they understand the legislation and—this is a different matter again—they have the confidence and the courage to use the powers available to them. It is really important, when you are a gold commander, that you are communicating with everyone on that policing operation, you are listening and you are understanding what is going on in the ground through your silver and bronze commanders. If something changes, because quite often that happens—a protest will start out and we will have planned and resourced for it, but it suddenly changes, and that could be an atmosphere or risk—we have to make sure that we are able to adapt and respond accordingly. I do not know if you have another example, Clair, but that is what we see on a regular basis now in the Metropolitan Police.
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
Obviously, London is the capital city. Thinking about the volume, the risk and the dynamic, I want to take you back to 28 March. There was a Together Alliance demonstration, which was social justice groups coming together. We also had a notification that the Palestine Solidarity Campaign wanted to come out, starting at a different location but joining the main march. We had a notification of a counterprotest that was going to be carried out by an Iranian anti-monarchy group who wanted to counterprotest the Palestine Solidarity campaign. At the same moment we had Palestine Action, who turned up outside New Scotland Yard showing support for a proscribed organisation, and then we had a funeral service for the Ayatollah at the Islamic Centre of England with a counterprotest outside. Some of those events were spontaneous, but that is a snapshot of a day in the life of London. You are trying to balance the rights of protesters with understanding the needs, the dynamics and the concerns of the community, which are really important. You have heard from all colleagues here about the necessity for engagement, and that starts really early. Some protest groups will notify us; others will not. We talk to those protest groups that we know. We have good community links, both with protest groups and with the community. We use our police liaison teams to start that communication early. As a gold commander, I would also meet those groups. So we take those concerns really seriously. However, we talked earlier about balance, and there has to be balance regarding the right to protest, although clearly without allowing anybody to intimidate another section of the community. So that is a snapshot of a day in the life of London in terms of how we balance all those different needs and how we use conditions. Unlike colleagues in Merseyside, because of the volume and extent of events that we have in London, we use conditions to restrict the rights of protesters with a justified reason. Since October 2023, we have used conditions around 188 times in London. That shows you the size and scale of how we have used conditions to restrict routes, times, start locations of events, end times and noise. As colleagues in Liverpool have described, we have conditions and we police those conditions but we also use our own lawful powers of stop and search and normal criminal offences that we manage every day, including hate crime legislation. We teach our officers to intervene, and we teach that it is not just a protest; it is still a situation where crimes may be committed, and they have all the legislation available for them to do that.
Chair
Thank you. For the purposes of our inquiry and report, you have made a lot of very clear observations about the challenges you face but also some helpful and constructive suggestions about what more needs to be done to help you in your challenging role of trying to balance those considerations. I would like to move us on now to questions about intelligence gathering and facial recognition. These are questions that have troubled some members of the committee.
Tom Gordon
Obviously a huge amount of work will go into trying to assess the issues that will be coming with these protests as and when they are being planned and under way. When you are gathering intelligence in relation to those protests, how do you ensure that you do so in a way that is necessary and proportionate and focuses on genuine risks of criminality or serious disruption, rather than lawful participation in a protest in its own right?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
Intelligence is the basis of what we work on now in a modern environment. We have a lot more ability to gather that now, and we have definitely invested within policing in making sure that it is accurate. A lot of information is put on open forums and we have intelligence officers who work on a daily basis, and I am sure Clair will add context to that in a second. So the Met have invested, and we have done that at a national level too through our National Police Operations Co-ordination Committee. There is a distinct difference between different types of protest. We have a team in the centre who collate data nationally, looking at regional feedback from intelligence sources and feedback on community tensions monitoring, and at particular times over particular issues we have to dial up the scale. For example, we had some very high-profile protests in the last month or so in Hampshire and Belfast. That has been scaled across the country and some of that protest has turned violent, so it is really important that we effectively monitor intelligence so that we can co-ordinate resourcing plans to adapt accordingly across the country. Clair, do you want to talk about the Met’s way of doing it?
Chair
I ask everyone to be brief because I am conscious that the House of Commons is voting later on, and we do not want to have to disrupt the committee proceedings if we can—but nor do I want to rush you in the excellent evidence you are giving us. I add the caveat that, if there is anything that you do not feel has been said that should be said, we will be very open to a written submission subsequently, and I promise that will be included in the evidence.
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
I will keep it brief, and we will follow up with anything else that you may need. From a Met perspective, as the chief describes, obviously the national intelligence collation is really important to the work that we do. We have a bespoke public order intelligence unit that is the focal point of where we start gathering our intelligence. That starts with social media scanning, our press liaison teams and our communities, our local BCUs—effectively, our boroughs coming together. We gather intelligence from all those areas, and we keep fastidious and accurate logs of the intelligence that we are gathering. We take our professional judgment from previous events and experience that we have had in London. Unfortunately, because of the nature of London and the numerous protests that we have, we have a lot of experience of what has happened at previous events. We bring all that intelligence together and assess it collectively to understand what we are dealing with, what the threat harms and risks are and how we use that intelligence to decide on our resourcing and how we plan.
Tom Gordon
Can I push this a bit further? I understand the concept of how you are describing you go about it, but the question I am getting at is more about what parameters, restrictions or limits there are on this to make sure that what you are doing is proportionate. You mentioned monitoring social media. Does that mean monitoring people who have already been flagged up as a risk, or are we talking Facebook groups where innocent people might be? What restrictions, or what framework, are you operating within?
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
You will know that there are levels of authority that we need to utilise if we are doing any intelligence scanning that puts us into a private space or a covert space. The public order intelligence unit that I have talked about is predominantly what we would call open-source scanning, meaning anything that is readily available on social media online that you or I could access, and we can see what is happening in those spaces. I mentioned audit trails: we keep an accurate record of the intelligence products that we are looking at, how we are using them and how we decide whether that is proportionate, lawful or necessary to do what we need to do, and that sits within those intelligence-gathering models. As a gold commander, I set the strategic intelligence requirement. I set out at the beginning my requirements for intelligence products to fit the event that I am looking at policing, whatever that might be, and then I expect my intelligence-gathering teams to start that process, working within the parameters in the legislation relating to how we go about intelligence gathering, and working to the law on that basis.
Chair
Thank you. Let us go to Baroness Hamwee with a question about facial recognition.
Baroness Hamwee
Which is developing very fast, of course. In a previous committee on which I sat, two successive Home Secretaries gave us great assurances that the human would always be in the loop in every use of facial recognition, but I think the term “the human in the loop” should not be used any longer; frankly, it is rather misleading. As part of the exercise that you have just described, I know you will have a watch list to use on the ground when facial recognition technology is deployed. How do you ensure that it is not going to have a chilling effect on members of the public who are exercising their right to protest when it is in use?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
Live facial recognition has a lot of positive aspects to it, especially when you think about some of the violent protests that we have seen. It gives us the ability to have on a watch list certain offenders who we would not want in particular areas because they have a propensity to cause violence. I can give the assurance that every deployment of live facial recognition is very carefully thought about by the gold and silver commanders of that operation to make sure that it really is justified and proportionate in relation to the event. It has a lot of positives and a lot of benefits. In the recent surveys that we have undertaken, over 80% of people gave feedback that they felt it was a very positive thing. However, like everything, people have subjective opinions on whether things are right to use or not, so we revisit that regularly. It is rationalised throughout the command logs when it is put into place. There are parameters around particular areas and times where it will be used to make sure it is addressing the threat, risk and harm that it is there for.
Baroness Hamwee
How do you get the message over to the public about what you have just been saying?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
That is a challenge because there are people and certain groups who feel that it is an infringement on rights and people’s civil liberties. We keep working on that, answering questions and trying to be quite open and transparent in relation to what we achieve out of it, but there is more we can do. It is an evolving piece of technology that has got more capability as time goes on. We have to showcase that so that we can keep public buy-in in relation to it.
Chair
Thank you. The committee would also be interested to know about bias that can appear in facial recognition. If you have anything on that which you would like to say to us in writing afterwards then we would be interested to hear it.
Tom Gordon
Obviously, live facial recognition technology is just one of the tools that you might use when you think about policing protests. I wondered what other tools that you use, and whether there is utilisation of AI in other ways, in intelligence gathering. I think back to the notable issue that we had with West Midlands, when there was the Tel Aviv-Aston Villa football game, how AI hallucinated in preparing that briefing, and the whole fallout that we saw from that. Right now, are you aware of any police forces using AI when it comes to preparing briefings and intelligence gathering or policing protest?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
AI is a fantastic piece of developing technology for us but, as you have alluded to, it has to be used very carefully. I cannot speak on behalf of every force across the country in relation to the use that you have just articulated, but I can say that chiefs have been clear that its use should not replace the human aspect of things. If you were to use elements of AI to put together any form of report—I will come to intelligence separately—then the human has to do the checks in relation to that; it cannot just be left to an automated process, because that would be wrong. I get that the purpose is that there is capacity and capability issues that it saves, but it cannot be inaccurate in any shape or form over something that is so vital. In relation to intelligence, I would be extremely reluctant to be reliant solely on AI. It has some purposes in narrowing certain things down but it cannot replace the element of human oversight. I do not know whether Lord Alton wants colleagues to give specific examples from other forces.
Chair
Yes, if they have a specific point.
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
I can offer some reassurance. There is a time and a place for the appropriate use of AI, but from a training perspective we could not be clearer that the strategy that will underpin the whole of the policing operation is written and owned by the gold commander. We are very clear that that should be done without the use of AI because that strategy contains outcomes and strategic intentions. There will be a summary of information, intelligence, powers and policy, all the things that you would expect to see, and the gold commander owns it from the start of the policing operation right through to the end. They therefore have to be in a position where they are able to defend that, should it be subject to scrutiny.
Chair
Thank you very much. That is new, cutting-edge technology. However, the question that Mr Gordon is now going to ask you concerns some very old methods. Indeed, I would like to hear the first answer to it from Assistant Chief Constable Wilson because this is about stop and search, and I am long enough in the tooth to remember, as a Liverpool Member of Parliament at the time of the Toxteth and Brixton riots, that part of that was generated because of the overuse of stop and search. Still, I shall not steal Mr Gordon’s thunder; I ask him to ask his question.
Tom Gordon
Thank you, Chair. I think it was Chief Superintendent Haynes who mentioned stop and search earlier. Stop and search without reasonable suspicion can be authorised when a senior officer reasonably believes that a protest-related offence may be committed in a specified locality. Given that no individual suspicion is required, what safeguards are in place to prevent this power being used disproportionately or having a chilling effect on protest?
Assistant Chief Constable Jennifer Wilson
Thank you. Chair, you are absolutely right in your recollection. We are still one of the highest users of stop and search. It is a power that absolutely needs to be used proportionately but it sends a clear message to people that if you are carrying weapons, if you are arming yourself—this is outside of the protest arena now, talking about serious violence and knife-related criminality—you can expect to be stopped and searched. As with every power, this power needs to be utilised properly and clearly explained; it is not just what you do but how you do it. Merseyside is one its highest users and our find rates are highly positive. We get a low volume of complaints, and we have a robust public scrutiny group wrapped around the use of stop and search. It is important to note that it is difficult to quantify the success of stop and search legislation in terms of the prevention and deterrent elements. On proportionate use, within the legislation there have to be authorities from certain ranks in policing, and that is within a set of parameters. We are really robust in terms of the profile of individuals who can fall subject to non-suspicion stop and search, recognising the impact that that can have on communities. Again, it is advertised; we are open and transparent in its use, and we have lots of independent members, either our independent advisory groups or members of the public, who join us in open scrutiny of stop and search, including review of body-worn video. That learning and debrief makes sure that we are constantly learning and building that back in to robust training to make sure that we get the balance right between keeping members of the public safe and maintaining and building trust and confidence.
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
To be honest with the committee, there is nothing further I could add because my colleague has given a very eloquent answer. I would say that is the position in a number of forces around the country.
Chair
Thank you. If there are other points that people want to make subsequently, please let us have them in writing and we will include them.
Peter Swallow
As you will know, serious disruption prevention orders were introduced in the Public Order Act 2023, and they can impose some significant prohibitions and requirements on a person’s future protest-related activity. I have some questions about how that relates to people’s Article 10 and 11 rights, but we should start by getting an understanding of whether this new power is in fact being used. The committee is not aware of any examples at all of any police force applying for an SDPO. Could anyone shed any light on that?
Chair
Assistant Chief Constable Wilson was shaking her head. Let us hear a voice from Liverpool.
Assistant Chief Constable Jennifer Wilson
We have not applied for one here within Merseyside, and as far as I am aware the CPS has not applied for one either. We had one case where we were considering application for a serious disruption prevention order, but we pursued prosecution for another substantive offence. Again, that was a case of close liaison with the Crown Prosecution Service and making sure that we picked the most appropriate route, recognising the impact that those orders can have in terms of restrictions.
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
I would like to answer from a training perspective. You are correct in your observations with regard to their use, and I recognise that there is more that can be done in this space. At the moment I am working with the College of Policing to understand what that could look like so we can make sure that commanders have sufficient knowledge and understanding, and there is a further piece of work that we are doing in consultation with our colleagues from the Crown Prosecution Service.
Peter Swallow
Obviously I do not want to go into individual cases—that would not be appropriate—but I imagine that everyone around this horseshoe can think of a few individuals who we could imagine might undergo certain activities that could well open them up to us if we had our way in wanting to see such powers used to stop those activities. It is perhaps surprising to hear that this possibly very broad power exists but since 2023 no police force has thought it appropriate or the right tool in the toolkit to use. Assistant Chief Constable Wilson, you mentioned that there was a situation where you thought a different power was more appropriate. I would like to just broaden out and ask the rest of the panel the reason why it is not being used. Chief Superintendent Haynes mentioned training, which I take on board. Is it not being used because it is the wrong tool in the toolkit, because other tools exist and they are better or simply because so many powers are coming online and this one has not been reached for yet but absolutely will be helpful in the future? I know that is a broad question that is difficult to answer, but this would be helpful for us as a committee to understand when we are looking at these very wide-ranging powers.
Chief Superintendent Clair Haynes
For us, it is a mixture. There is training that needs to improve from our perspective as a police service, and we work closely with the college and the national leads to improve that training. Like colleagues in Merseyside, we too have had instances where there has been another route that the prosecution in conjunction with the CPS have decided is the right path for us to take because of the impact on them. As time moves on, SDPOs may become more relevant in certain spaces, as you have alluded to—certain individuals that we could probably think about in this room in terms of how these orders would apply. That is certainly something we need to take away and look at, both regarding our own police service and, more broadly, probably nationally. Up to now we have been in a space where there is other legislation that has been more well used and more traditional for us to turn to, legislation that we are familiar with and whose use and success mean we have reached for it first.
Chair
Let us move on because the clock is against us, I am afraid.
Sir Desmond Swayne
In the dialogue that precedes a demonstration, how do you attempt to overcome the innate distrust of the police that will exist in some protest groups? To what extent are operational plan red lines laid down, or are you prepared to negotiate and be flexible to accommodate the interests of a peaceful demonstration?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
Your question is very valid, Sir Desmond. The protest liaison officers perform an essential role for us. They do that early engagement, and they are able to outline what would be acceptable outcomes to meet the objectives of what the protest tenders want themselves while causing minimal disruption but not serious disruption. That engagement has truly had positive consequences for us. Protest liaison officers have been specifically trained. They have built up experience of working with different groups and over time have built up the trust that you referred to with the groups. What is really important is that what is negotiated in the build-up to an event is stood by in the delivery. That ongoing dialogue is essential for us.
Assistant Chief Constable Claire Armes
We must not forget that the absolute bedrock of policing in our country is neighbourhood policing. Our neighbourhood policing officers are working tirelessly within communities on a day-to-day basis, feeding back information to us and supporting us in our strategic objectives. All of us—I speak for my colleagues on the panel as well as gold commanders—will hold stakeholder briefings. You will probably be familiar with the phrase “no surprises”. By that, we mean that we are open and transparent in our communication. That sometimes means we have to deliver difficult messages, but likewise it is important that we hear difficult messages as well so that we can reach a position where we are acting proportionately and legally but also responding to the needs of the communities.
Alex Sobel
I have been an MP for nine years and in that time we have had a lot of legislation relating to protest and public order, particularly since 2022. Has all this legislation made the way that you police easier? Has it reduced disruption and disorder connected with protest, or has it made relating to protest activity more complex?
Chief Constable Mark Hobrough
It would be wrong for me to say that things have got easier and protest has reduced, because the facts would belie that statement. In recent years we have seen an astronomical increase in the number of protests over different things, for a variety of reasons that we have already talked about in this meeting today. The legislation has had to come to Parliament for different amendments, as we have already talked about, with regard to rapidly changing scenarios and different tactics being used. You will be more than aware that Lord Macdonald has been tasked with looking at the Public Order Act, which is 40 years of age and was written at a time when international things did not have a local impact. It was written at a time where macro was not going to micro as rapidly, and it did not have any context for the digital era or online activity. The review that he has undertaken and the recommendations that he submitted to the Home Secretary are under consideration right now by the Government. The changes that have been made in the interim are based on the amendments to the existing Act and have been helpful in tackling some of those issues—I have already talked about some of the tactical challenges that they have addressed—but they have caused some issues too. Just because something is written down in an Act as a power, as colleagues have said, that does not always mean that it is right to execute it at that time. The context of it, the area where it is being undertaken and the capabilities of the staff at the scene might mean that it is not the right thing to do or that it is something to do retrospectively. So there is a bit of a difference in what happens and then policing gets criticised in relation to that aspect.
Chair
A visitor once asked, “What are all the bells about?”, and was given the reply, “It’s just one of the prisoners trying to escape”—although that might not be appropriate, given the witnesses that we have here today. The bells you can hear mean that a Division has just been called in the House of Commons, so my parliamentary colleagues from the Commons will have to go and do their duty. When they return, I hope we will be able to pick up where we left off, but for now I must adjourn the meeting with these words: order, order.