Simon T. Kaye

 The morning of Thursday April 1^st hinted at the unseasonably warm and sunny weather that was to come.

As the throngs of protesters began their marches and vigils in London, they had no way of knowing just how much of that long, hot day they were going to end up spending outdoors, without food, water, or freedom of movement. Neither did the majority of the thousands of people who had come to make themselves heard as the G20 convened in an anonymous-looking convention centre elsewhere in London.

Much has already been said and written about the crowd-control tactic of ‘Kettling’. It caused a flurry of consternation in 2001 when the police deployed a solid line of men around a group of May Day protesters in Oxford Circus and constricted the mass of people within.

The cordon in action

The debate which followed culminated in a legal ruling, just this year – that the use of the kettling tactic had been legitimate. Clearly the London police forces have taken this precedent to heart: if it was fair in one case, then it is fair game in every other.

So perhaps it should have been no surprise when mounted police first charged the ranks of protesters, and then a line of batons and riot shields enveloped the crowd entirely. Until that moment, the police had behaved calmly and professionally.

Some people spend the whole day in the kettle; eight hours and more. An elderly couple, completely unassociated with the protesters, had become trapped with the rest: they were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

The police did not countenance letting that couple out; neither did they allow a journalist to leave, despite his obviously possessing the relevant credentials. Families, including small children, were treated no differently. No excuse would do: one person urgently needed to meet an ill relative in order to care for her, but the line remained closed. A man with a broken arm was allowed medical attention – but his friend was not allowed to go with him.

Right now we are all appalled by the tragic death of Ian Tomlinson, and at the footage of his being struck by a police officer moments beforehand. The investigation into this matter must proceed. But we must not lose sight of the broader actions that the police undertook the very same day. ‘Kettling’ should come under similar review.

The police seem to believe that a protest has become unlawful, and therefore suppressible, if it starts to block roads and obstruct thoroughfares.

The majority of the actual violence and vandalism that took place can be traced back to the confrontational atmosphere which settled upon the demonstrators as a result of their incarceration. Where before the miscreants and troublemakers had been a tiny minority, the thousands of people alienated by a seemingly uncaring police force were liable to become angry and even aggressive – and that’s exactly what happened.

The police have forgotten that one legal ruling cannot constitute a permanent bending of civil rights law. There are serious implications to what happened that day, from the insensitive group-think of the police to the simple restriction on freedom of movement, which is regarded everywhere as a fundamental human right.

Boris Johnson is wrong. This police tactic was disproportionate and unfair to the vast majority of protesters, who had legitimate concerns and sought only to voice them, quite legally.

Is there anybody left who seriously questions whether ‘kettling’ should be banned from the Police toolkit of crowd control tactics?