Labour’s ‘deeply alarming’ attack on protest rights

British authorities have severely restricted the right to protest in contravention of their international human rights obligations, creating an environment in which peaceful dissent is increasingly treated as a criminal act, Human Rights Watch said in its latest report.

‘Silencing the Streets’: The Right to Protest Under Attack in the UK documents that the UK’s Labour government has failed to reverse sweeping anti-protest laws introduced by the previous Conservative government. 

READ: Silencing the Streets

Instead, Labour has attempted to expand them with the Crime and Policing Bill 2025 and through the unprecedented misuse of terrorism legislation to target and criminalize peaceful protest. The Crime and Policing bill, pending before parliament, is to be debated in the House of Lords in January 2026.

Chilling

“The UK is now adopting protest-control tactics imposed in countries where democratic safeguards are collapsing,” said Lydia Gall, senior Europe and Central Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “The UK should oppose such measures, not replicate and endorse them.”

The Labour government has taken a deeply alarming direction on protest rights and appears to be determined to suppress these rights further instead of requiring government accountability for policing, Human Rights Watch said. 

Recent protest restrictions result from a combination of vague statutory provisions and broad police discretion, creating a legal environment in which the authorities can curtail demonstrations with limited oversight. 

The Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (PCSCA 2022) and the Public Order Act 2023 (POA 2023) broaden police discretion to impose conditions on protesters, make pre-emptive arrests, and pursue prison sentences for nonviolent protest activity, which in the past typically resulted in fines or community service. 

The report, based on research across 2024 and 2025, shows that protesters are increasingly detained, charged, and in some cases sentenced to multi-year prison terms for non–violent actions such as attending planning meetings. The inconsistent and sometimes arbitrary enforcement of these provisions contributes to confusion and has a chilling effect on dissent.

Suppressing

A striking example of overreach is the case of a retired social worker, Trudi Warner, arrested and charged with contempt of court for quietly holding a sign outside a courthouse informing jurors of their rights. 

The High Court dismissed the case as “fanciful” and confirmed that she had not attempted to influence any juror. Despite this, the Labour government initially filed an appeal before abandoning the case.