Passengers from three coaches, who were on their way to an anti-war
demonstration at a US airbase at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire, are
challenging the actions of three police forces that prevented them from
reaching the protest. The case focuses on events near Fairford last
March,
but will have a much wider impact: the would-be protestors argue that
the
Human Rights Act prevents the police from relying on ‘common law
powers’ to detain them.

On 22nd March 2003 three coaches of about 150 peace campaigners were
prevented by the police from attending an anti-war demonstration outside
RAF Fairford. Police stopped and searched the coaches about six miles
from their destination. Officers claimed that the items seized during
the search led them to believe a breach of the peace would occur at the
airbase. These offending articles included white paper overalls,
scarves, some plastic toy soldiers and a frisbee.

As a result, officers forced the coaches back on to the motorway and
surrounded them with police vans and motorcycle outriders all the way
back to London. Some of the passengers dialled 999 to report that they
were being kidnapped but were told they were not being detained and were
free to go where ever they liked. However, attempts to negotiate even a
toilet break were rebuffed. One woman passenger had to resort to
urinating into a sandwich box in full view of police with video cameras.

About 60 of the passengers are part of a group involved in the legal
action.
One of the passengers commented that: 'The police's actions on the day
had the effect of criminalising and marginalising dissent. It is vitally
important that people can protest freely, especially about a war pursued
without legal or moral justification.' John Halford a solicitor at
Bindman
and Partners who represents one of the passengers, said: “Democracies
are founded on the right not to be detained without charge, freedom of
speech and the right to protest. These basic rights are more important
than ever in times of war, but that is also when they are most
vulnerable to attack.'

9am-10am, Thurs 15 January 2004 - Demonstrate outside the Royal Courts
of Justice on the Strand. For more information on Fairford Coach Action,
phone Jane on 07817 483 167 or Dave on 07779 599 560

Notes for Journalists
1. For more details about the case see
 http://www.fairfordcoachaction.org.uk
2. On the 22nd of March 2003, three days after the start of the US/UK
war on Iraq, a demonstration, 'Flowers for Fairford', organised by the
Gloucestershire Weapons Inspectors  http://www.gwi.org.uk attracted over
3000 protestors to the airbase. Local groups organised transport to
Fairford from 37 locations across the UK. One other coach (from Swindon)
was also turned back by the police.
3. Fairford airbase was the site of excessive policing during the war on
Iraq. GWI, Berkshire CIA and Liberty have issued a dossier relating the
experiences of protesting there. The report, "Casualty of War - 8 weeks
of
counter-terrorism in rural England", documents how section 44 Terrorism
Act 2000 stop and search powers were misused. See  http://www.gwi.org.uk
for full details. For further information about
RAF Fairford see  http://www.fairfordpeacewatch.com
4. The Human Rights Act 1998 came into force in October 2000. It
requires the police and other public authorities to avoid breaching key
European Convention Human Rights Articles save where legislation makes
this impossible. Amongst the key rights are Article 5 (deprivation of
liberty
must be justified in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law and
on
one of the five grounds listed in paragraph (1) of the Article), Article
8
(which requires justification for interference with private life,
including
those which impact upon physical and psychological integrity), Article
10
(freedom of speech and expression) and Article 11 (freedom of assembly).
5. At common law a constable may arrest a person without warrant who he
or she reasonably believes will commit a breach of the peace in the
immediate future, even though at the time of the arrest such person has
not committed any breach. This power is subject to a number of strict
restrictions, however: the belief must relate to an act or threatened
act
harming any person or, in his presence, his property, or which puts a
person in fear of such harm; the belief must relate to the likely
actions of the particular individual or individuals against whom the
power is used; and
when the particular individual is acting lawfully at the time the power
is
used, the threat of his committing a breach of the peace must be
sufficiently real and imminent to justify the use of such a draconian
power.
6. Interviews with passengers from the coaches can be arranged (please
enquire - see contact details above). Dramatic, high-quality, digital
video
footage and photographs are also available. Permission to use them will
be
granted on a case-by-case basis (rates vary). Contact 07817 483 167.
7. Full background information is available at the website for the
Fairford Coach Action. Visit the site for links to related web articles,
and testimonial statements.  http://www.fairfordcoachaction.org.uk
8. The solicitor representing the case, John Halford, can be contacted
at Bindman & Partners on 020 7833 4433.