Inexperienced officers in protest frontline – never again, say MPs

An inquiry by MPs into the 1 April G20 protests has concluded that untrained police officers must never again be placed in the frontline of public protest.

From the Guardian:

The conclusion from the Commons home affairs select committee inquiry into the G20 protests of April 1 follows admissions from senior Metropolitan police officers that some inexperienced officers, who were clearly quite scared, used “inappropriate force”.

The report by the cross-party group of MPs says they “cannot condone the use of untrained, inexperienced officers on the frontline of a public protest under any circumstances”.

The inquiry also calls for the police to seriously consider whether they can continue with the use of tactics such as kettling – containing protesters behind cordons for a sustained period of time – and the controlled use of force against those who appear hostile without first holding a public debate over the future of policing public protests.

The report includes sections on Relations with the Media, Communications between Protesters and Police, Use of Close Containment, The Use of Force and The Use of Tasers. It does not comment on the death of Ian Tomlinson, instead summarising the policing of the G20 protests as a “remarkably successful operation” and making only oblique reference to “a few high-profile incidents.”

The report also says that, given the use of untrained and inexperienced officers “in such a highly combustible atmosphere”, the operation’s success was down to luck.

You can read the full report here.

Also see Libby Purves in the Times on how policing civilians is a subtle and unresearched science.

As the Committee Chairman Keith Vaz said,

The basic principle that the police must remember is that protestors are not criminals – the police’s doctrine must remain focused on allowing protest to happen peacefully.

Read more by or more about , , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/15503 for Twitter and emails.

4 Comments

  • God I’m a cynic these days.

    My immediate thought is:

    “In the wake of headlines showing him in a less than positive light, Keith Vaz attempts to score points with the anti-authority & anti-authoritarian guardian types by appearing to confront the police.
    Cleverly he manages to also score points with the police by blaming failures on ‘innexperienced’ officers rather than police policy or even incompetent officers.’ ”

    And as I don’t have any time to wade through the actual evidence I guess I’ll stay ambivalent on Vaz and the Met.

  • Europhile-EUphobe 30th Jun '09 - 10:37am

    So the select committee swallows whole the argument ‘It isn’t our good police force becoming ever more extreme in its policing of dissent and using ever more draconean interpretations of its powers (e.g. kettling), but a few officers we had to use who weren’t properly trained (probably not properly trained to put their id badges on either) and the problem will all go away once we get them trained (presumably trained not to get caught).

  • I don’t swallow the whole ‘untrained officers’ was the problem line. For one thing ALL PCs get basic training in public order policing as part of their training to become a PC. Secondly as far as I can see it was not ‘untrained’ Officers that were at the centre of most of the most contiverial actions but rather the complete opposite, the supposedly highly trained and specialist Terratorial Support Group Officers.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User Avatararnieg 1st Aug - 4:33pm
    I think the income in advance may relate to Conference Office activity - bookings taken for the following March's Spring conference. I understand last year...
  • User AvatarRob Parsons 1st Aug - 4:29pm
    I haven't said anywhere that free trade is wrong. But free trade works where information is free as well as the trade. Dispute settlement may...
  • User AvatarJennie 1st Aug - 4:19pm
    Whereas repeatedly abusing Caron and the rest of the LDV team in the comments to this and other articles is perfectly permissible under your definition...
  • User AvatarGF 1st Aug - 4:11pm
    Charles Kennedy is absolutely right; the USP provides a vital cross-subsidy from urban to rural areas without which the latter would become dangerously isolated. The...
  • User AvatarSimon McGrath 1st Aug - 3:50pm
    Oh dear. Almost everything in this piece is wrong. The benefits of free trade are pretty well know and it is absurd to say that...
  • User AvatarRoland 1st Aug - 3:39pm
    >" The only justification for it is security of supply" Fracking fails spectacularly at that test: totally insufficient reserves have been discovered to make any...