Last week, the government forced through parliament the controversial “cumulative disruption” power, which enables police to ban protests on the grounds that they take place repeatedly. This attack on the fundamental freedoms of assembly and expression has been strongly criticised by the UN and human rights organisations.

Introduced by the Lords as an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill, this legislation was not subject to full debate and scrutiny in parliament, MPs were denied a separate vote on the cumulative disruption amendment, and the vote on the bill was pushed through before the conclusions of the independent review.

This is the latest measure in a trend to impose restrictions on the democratic right to protest, and raises serious civil liberties concerns.

As noted by Liberal Democrat peer Lord Strasburger in a recent article for Middle East Eye, banning repeat protests ignores a basic lesson of democratic history – that sustained action is central to achieving democratic change:

From women’s suffrage to civil rights to anti-war movements, meaningful change has always depended on people returning, again and again, to make their voices heard. Curtailing protest simply because it is persistent strikes at the heart of that tradition, and risks targeting the very causes that are most likely to be worthy of protest.

Together with Lord Marks and Baroness Doocey, our justice and police spokespersons in the Lords respectively, Lord Strasburger backed an amendment in the Lords to remove the repeat-protest provisions from the Bill. That amendment was not ultimately put to a vote after the Conservatives declined to support it.

During last week’s debate in the Commons, several Liberal Democrat MPs, including our Home Affairs Spokesperson Max Wilkinson, made clear our Party’s strong opposition to the banning of repeat protests, and to the authoritarian protest measures in the Bill more broadly.

The government’s attempt to link this crackdown on civil liberties to the Heaton park synagogue attack is strongly refuted by Jonathan Rosenhead, Executive Committee member of Jewish Voice for Liberation, and a regular with the Jewish Bloc for Palestine at the marches.

In a recent article for the New Arab, he writes:

To someone like myself who identifies as Jewish, the claim that this rewriting and diminution of everyone’s rights of free assembly and protest is taking place ‘to protect Jews’ is an added outrage. If our civil liberties are dismantled, Jews will be the losers as much as anyone else.

Consider the Jewish commitment to the National Marches for Palestine, which this legislation hopes to neuter… There have always been hundreds of us, and sometimes into four figures – a living, walking refutation of the claim that repressing these marches is necessary for the safety of Jews.

The protests for Palestinian rights are often uncomfortable for governments, and in many ways tie directly into this gradual erosion of freedom of expression and assembly, which we are currently witnessing. We saw that in the decision to proscribe the direct action group Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation in June 2025 – a move the High Court in February found to be unlawful, disproportionate and an abuse of power. Unsurprisingly, the government intends to continue spending taxpayers’ money to appeal the High Court ruling, as they continue using police funds and time to arrest – so far – 2700 people peacefully holding signs.

Liberal Democrats strongly opposed the proscription, as Ed Davey’s response made clear:

This ruling shows that proscribing Palestine Action was a grave misuse of terrorism laws. Labour must accept its mistake, drop its appeal and stop wasting taxpayers’ money suppressing civil liberties.

As Israel continues its campaign of genocide, apartheid and ethnic cleansing in Palestine – the death penalty law against Palestinians being the latest, horrific measure – the UK’s focus should be on using its influence to help end violations of international law, not penalising those who speak out against them. Neither the suffragettes nor the anti-apartheid movement succeeded because they protested once and then went home.

Restrictions on the right to protest should alarm anyone who values the civil liberties that are the foundation and essence of the Liberal Democrats. As Lord Strasburger warns in his Middle East Eye piece, the consequences of this crackdown will extend far beyond any single movement:

The authoritarian protest measures in the Crime and Policing Bill, and the misuse of terrorist proscription powers in the case of Palestine Action, are not isolated developments. They are part of a wider shift in how protest is being treated in Britain, from a protected democratic right to something increasingly conditional on the judgement of those in power at the time and local police.

At a time when democratic space is narrowing, the right to civil protest matters more than ever. As a member of the Liberal Democrat Friends of Palestine Executive Committee, I will continue to stand alongside those mobilising peacefully for Palestinian rights, including at the next national demonstration for Palestine to commemorate the Nakba on 16 May. All members and supporters are encouraged to join our Liberal Democrat contingent at the march. Email [email protected] for more information.

* Nina Wessel is an active member in Southwark. A former diplomat specialised in human rights with UN, EU and OSCE. She worked in Ramallah in the West Bank for a year, living the daily realities of the occupation.