Met Police chief Mark Rowley is facing intense scrutiny over his suggestion it would have been “illegal” to have arrested pro-Palestine demonstrators climbing on a war memorial in London.
Not least from legal expert Steven Barrett, who says Rowley was “wrong” in his assertion.
It comes as Members of a breakaway group scaled the Royal Artillery Memorial at Hyde Park Corner on Wednesday night after a protest demanding a ceasefire outside Parliament, the force said.
Speaking on GB News, Barrett offered an explanation as he suggested Met officers should have been in a position to arrest perpetrators.
Steven Barrett has hit out at Mark Rowley
PA / GB NEWS
“Back in the day, police officers didn’t have a prosecution authority, they brought cases themselves”, he said.
“The last thing anybody wanted was if officers would be confused if they could arrest anyone. We have over-created offences for hundreds of years.
LATEST DEVELOPMENTS
- ‘Wouldn’t be here if not for our forebears!’ Britons give verdict on war memorial protest law change plans
- 'Beyond angry!' Humza Yousaf in FURIOUS rant at Labour MPs after SNP ceasefire vote rejected
- MPs vote to REJECT Israel ceasefire in landslide as Shadow Ministers resign from top roles in Labour rebellion
“What happened last night, they could have reached for one offence and say ‘this is outraging public decency’.
“I think an officer under those circumstances would have reasonable grounds to arrest under that one offence. There’s also more offences. I started getting messages from criminal barristers to say breaching the public peace can be one.
“This morning, an MP, Jonathan Gullis, pointed out he had created a specific statutory offence which would apply here. There would be reasonable grounds to suspect the war memorial would be damaged.”
Barrett explained that the wreaths sat by the memorial put the perpetrators in a position where they were breaking the law.
The Met have claimed they were not able to arrest protesters
X
He said: “The memorial was surrounded by wreaths. This law protects those wreaths. They are quite flimsy and if you step on one, they are going to break.
“These gentlemen were not paying much attention to where they were standing, so there was reason to suspect one of those wreaths would be damaged.
“That is another criminal offence and another reason to arrest that individual.”
He went on to attack Rowley’s statement in a stinging rant, claiming the Met Chief is “below the level of competence” you would expect from someone in his position.
“He is starting to say things which make no sense, are unhelpful, and misleading”, he said.
Asked about the police response, Sir Mark said: “What the officer didn’t do last night was make up a law that it’s illegal to do something and do an arrest which would have been illegal, clearly.”
He defended the actions of officers on the ground, describing them as “sensible” in the circumstances, adding: “The officers intervened, as officers often are doing, to try and de-escalate risk of conflict, even when there isn’t explicit power to do it.”
The commissioner suggested there were elements of current police powers which “do not work very well” and that the Met would be discussing these with Government.
But wider issues, like the balance between the right to protest and the impact it may have on others, were a matter for Parliament, he said.