Earning His Corn!
| Date | 01 July 1981 |
| Published date | 01 July 1981 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X8105400302 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
A. GOODSON, O.B.E., Q.P.M., LL.B.
Chief Constable
of
Leicestershire.
EARNING
HIS
CORNI
Perhaps the most disruptive influence that can affect a multi-racial
community is a notification that the National
Front
is to hold a
march in the neighbourhood. In many cases, the National
Front
has
no special relationship or representationin thearea and, whilethe osten-
sible object of the demonstration may be couched in politicalterms (e.g.
to demonstrateagainst unemployment), itisseen locally asadeliberate
pr.ovocation to the ethnic minority in the community. The effect of
the announcement is immediate. The automatic reaction of the
immigrants is to resist the intrusion at all costs. Coloured community
leaders rally support, initiate a public campaign of opposition, and
promise confrontation. They see this as a threat to their presencein
the country.
For
other reasons, the left-wing agitators see this as an
opportunity to stir up community disorder, cloaked in the habit of
political activity, and a chance to bring violence to the streets. Other
persons concerned with community affairs - Members of
Parliament, councillors, local politicians, clergymen - see the very
real danger of disturbance to the community, perhaps resulting in
personal injury and damage to property, and they seek to avoid the
situation. All in all, the diverse attitudes which are reflected in any
community come together on this issue, perhaps for different
reasons, and all call for a ban on the march. And so they turn to the
chief constable.
The
popular belief is that he can ban the march. Of course, this is
not true. Outside London that power rests with the district council
and then only if the Home Secretary agrees
..
But there is only one
person who can
start
up the machinery for getting a ban - and that's
the chief constable.
If
he sits tight and does nothing, then there can be
no ban. So it all really rests on him. And in deciding whether to
ban
or not, he has to go by a pretty strict rule which leaves him little room
to manoeuvre. In the words of the Public Order Act 1936,hecan only
go for a ban if his powers will not be sufficient to enable him to
prevent serious public disorder. And
that
is all! The consideration is
"serious public disorder": that's the sole criterion. There's no
mention of the many other reasons that people may have for wanting
to ban a march: the cost of policing it, the disruption to the
community, the aggravation of racial tension, the undesirable
political philosophy of the marchers. These may be very good social
arguments for stopping amarch, but the law takes no account of
them, and neither can the chief constable.
July
1981
231
To continue reading
Request your trial