Public order law - Regulation of processions and assemblies

Learning Outcomes

This article provides a detailed explanation of the regulation of public processions and assemblies in England and Wales. You will be able to explain the statutory framework for public order including the key distinctions between processions, assemblies, and trespassory assemblies, along with the practical and legal consequences of each. You will become familiar with the requirements for advance notice, statutory powers of the police to impose conditions or prohibit events, and the limitations and scope of police action in regulating public protest. You will be able to apply the principle of proportionality and the requirements of necessity under the Public Order Act 1986, and to analyse how human rights, including Articles 10 and 11 of the ECHR, shape the balance between maintaining public order and protecting protest rights. The article enables you to apply public order law to realistic scenarios and identify when police powers may be lawfully challenged as excessive or contrary to statutory or constitutional principles.

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand the regulation of public processions and assemblies under the Public Order Act 1986, including police powers, prohibitions, trespassory assemblies, and ECHR considerations, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• The meaning and significance of advance notice for public processions under the Public Order Act 1986, including when exceptions apply
• The distinction between public processions, public assemblies, and trespassory assemblies in public order law
• The statutory basis for, and the limits of, police powers to impose conditions on public demonstrations
• The grounds and procedures for prohibiting processions, including the requirement for Home Secretary or local authority approval
• The legal framework for trespassory assemblies, including criteria for prohibition and the relevant threshold numbers
• The principle of proportionality, its requirements, and how courts review police decisions for necessity and proportionality under the ECHR and domestic human rights law
• The interaction between public order powers and rights protected under Articles 10 and 11 ECHR, with particular attention to necessity, legality, and case law guidance
• The legal implications of non-compliance, including when lack of notice affects lawfulness and when spontaneous protest is protected

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. What information must be included in the advance notice for a public procession under the Public Order Act 1986?
2. In what circumstances can the police impose conditions on a public assembly?
3. What is the principle of proportionality, and how does it affect the exercise of police powers under the Public Order Act 1986?
4. Can a spontaneous protest be prohibited for lack of advance notice?

Introduction

The regulation of public processions and assemblies is foundational to the balance between freedom of assembly and expression and the necessity of maintaining public order and the prevention of disorder or crime in England and Wales. The Public Order Act 1986 (POA 1986), as amended by legislation such as the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994, provides the core statutory structure for lawful protest and police intervention. This framework is supplemented and limited by the Human Rights Act 1998, which requires authorities to respect qualified constitutional rights derived from Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): the rights to freedom of expression and of peaceful assembly. Understanding how these rights and statutory controls interact—and the limits of police powers to control, restrict, or prohibit gatherings—is central for public law and essential for SQE1.

Legal Framework: Processions and Assemblies

Advance Notice for Public Processions

Organisers of public processions intended to demonstrate support for or opposition to views or actions, to publicise a cause, or to mark or commemorate an event, must give written notice of the procession to the police. Under s 11 POA 1986, notice must be delivered to a police station in the area where the procession is proposed to start at least six clear days before the event. The notice must specify:

• The date and time of the procession
• Its proposed route
• The name and address of at least one organiser

Notice is required unless it is not reasonably practicable to comply—for example, in the case of a truly spontaneous demonstration or where the event is so customary that advance notice is not possible or not practically enforceable. Failure to give notice without a reasonable excuse can be an offence for the organiser, but the lack of notice does not automatically render the procession unlawful or justify outright prohibition.

Key Term: public procession
A group moving together as a body in a public place, generally on a highway or where the public has access, for a common purpose such as protest, demonstration, or commemorative event.

Key Term: advance notice
Written notification required by law before holding a public procession, specifying essential event details, and serving as a mechanism for advance police planning and engagement.

Imposing Conditions on Processions and Assemblies

The chief officer of police, or a senior officer delegated, may impose conditions on a public procession (s 12 POA 1986) if it is reasonably believed that the procession may result in:

• Serious public disorder
• Serious damage to property
• Serious disruption to the life of the community
• Intimidation

Conditions may relate to the route, to stopping points, duration, and numbers of participants. For public assemblies, s 14 POA 1986 provides similar powers. A public assembly is defined as a gathering of two or more people in a public place, wholly or partly in the open air. Police may impose conditions as to the location, duration, or maximum numbers if they reasonably believe that disorder, damage, disruption, or intimidation may result.

Key Term: public assembly
A gathering of two or more persons in a public place, wholly or partly in the open air, for a shared purpose or cause.

Key Term: condition
A restriction or requirement imposed by the police on a procession or assembly aimed at mitigating risks of serious disorder, damage, disruption, or intimidation.

The police must communicate any conditions clearly to organisers and, where possible, to participants. It is an offence for a person who knowingly fails to comply with such a condition, unless they can show reasonable excuse.

Scope of Police Powers and Limits

Imposing conditions is a significant restriction on protest rights and is subject to strict requirements of necessity, proportionality, and reasonable belief. The exercise of these powers is reviewable in court, and the police must be able to demonstrate, based on information available at the time, why less restrictive means would not suffice. Evidence must anchor any belief that disorder, damage, or disruption might materialise.

Case law illustrates that mere inconvenience or minor annoyance is insufficient; the threshold is serious public disorder, serious damage, or major disruption. For example, conditions relating solely to noise or minor obstruction of a highway may be vulnerable to challenge if not demonstrably necessary for one of the statutory reasons.

Key Term: serious disruption
More than mere inconvenience; disruption that has a substantial adverse impact on the lives of ordinary members of the community.

Prohibition of Processions

While the imposition of conditions is the usual mechanism for police control, there is also a statutory power to prohibit processions in exceptional circumstances. Under s 13 POA 1986, the chief officer of police may apply to the local authority to prohibit all processions (or a specified class of processions) in the area for up to three months when there is a reasonable belief that the powers to impose conditions will not be sufficient to prevent serious public disorder.

The local authority must receive consent from the Secretary of State (Home Secretary) before making an order. In London, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner applies directly to the Secretary of State. This power can only be exercised if lesser powers, such as conditions under s 12, are judged insufficient. It is not intended for use against routine, peaceful protest, and any order must be proportionate to the anticipated risks.

Key Term: prohibition order
An order, made by a local authority with approval from the Secretary of State or Home Secretary, banning all or specific classes of processions in a defined area for a set period due to the risk of uncontrollable serious public disorder.

The prohibition does not affect other types of assembly, which remain subject to the police’s power to impose conditions, not prohibition.

Trespassory Assemblies

A trespassory assembly is defined under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 (CJPOA 1994) as an assembly of 20 or more persons held on land in the open air to which the public has no right of access or only a limited right, and which may cause serious disruption to the life of the community or significant damage to land, buildings, or monuments of historical or scientific importance.

Where the police reasonably believe such an assembly is contemplated, they may apply to the local authority (and, in London, the Commissioner applies to the Secretary of State) for a prohibition order covering a defined area for up to four days and within a maximum five-mile radius. The order prohibits trespassory assemblies on the specified land during the period covered and makes it a criminal offence to organise, participate, or incite such an event in contravention of the order.

Key Term: trespassory assembly
An assembly of 20 or more people on land in the open air where the public has no or limited right of access, and where the gathering risks causing serious disruption or significant damage to important sites.

It must be noted that the prohibition does not extend absolutely: the order will only capture assemblies that go beyond lawful use of, for example, a highway. In DPP v Jones, the House of Lords confirmed that peaceful non-obstructive assembly on a highway, consistent with its use, does not become trespassory merely because police or local authorities object to the participants’ cause.

Police Powers and Proportionality

The exercise of all police powers over protest is limited by principles of lawfulness, necessity, and—crucially—proportionality. Restrictions must be the minimum necessary to address the disorder, disruption, or intimidation foreseen, and must be tailored so as not to go further than required to achieve the legitimate aim identified.

Key Term: proportionality
Any restriction of a right (such as that to peaceful assembly or expression) must be no more than necessary to achieve a legitimate purpose and must represent a fair balance between individual rights and the interests of the community.

Proportionality is a central principle under both the ECHR and domestic judicial review. Any exercise of police powers that infringes Articles 10 and 11 ECHR must be justified by reference to legality, necessity, and the least restrictive means. In practice, courts have regularly scrutinised police decisions to impose conditions or prohibit assemblies, and have found blanket or excessively broad restrictions to be unlawful when not properly justified.

Conditions and prohibitions must be targeted, limited in time and scope, and based on objective evidence. Collective punishment or wholesale restrictions are inherently suspect. The availability of judicial review ensures that rights are not overridden except where strictly required for public safety or order.

Human Rights Considerations

Articles 10 and 11 of the ECHR, as incorporated by the Human Rights Act 1998, protect, respectively, freedom of expression and the right of peaceful assembly and association. These are not absolute rights; both may be subject to lawful restrictions as “prescribed by law” and as “necessary in a democratic society” for aims such as maintaining public order, protecting national security, or safeguarding the rights of others.

Key principles from Article 11 jurisprudence include:

• Restrictions must have a clear legal basis and be accessible and predictable.
• They must address a pressing social need.
• They must be proportionate to the aims pursued.
• There must be a fair balance between the rights of the protesters and the rights/needs of others in society.

Overbroad preventive bans, absence of specific evidence justifying restrictions, or punishment for non-notification in cases of genuine spontaneity are unlikely to meet these requirements.

Key Term: necessity (ECHR context)
Any restriction must be "necessary in a democratic society," meaning it must correspond to a pressing social need and be proportionate to the aim pursued.

Judicial Review and Procedural Principles

Any decision by the police to impose or enforce conditions or prohibitions affecting the exercise of protest rights is subject to judicial review. The courts review such decisions for lawfulness, reasonableness, and compatibility with the ECHR. The decision-maker must establish both a statutory ground and proper proportionality for any interference with rights. Failures of process, including not providing clear reasons or evidence, may justify setting aside a restriction.

Worked examples below illustrate the application of these rules to factual contexts.

Worked Example 1.1

A group plans a march through a city centre to protest government policy. They submit advance notice to the police. Intelligence suggests a risk of violence from counter-protesters. The police impose conditions altering the route and limiting the duration.

Answer:
The police may lawfully impose conditions under the POA 1986 if they reasonably believe it is necessary to prevent serious disorder. The conditions must be proportionate to the risk and not go further than necessary. The risk must be based on credible evidence and the conditions should be targeted specifically at the anticipated threat.

Worked Example 1.2

Residents spontaneously gather outside the town hall after a controversial local decision. No advance notice is given. The crowd grows, and tensions rise. The police impose conditions to disperse the assembly.

Answer:
If it was not reasonably practicable to give advance notice, the lack of notice does not make the assembly unlawful. The police may impose conditions to prevent disorder, but the restrictions must be proportionate and necessary in light of the escalating risk. Human rights law requires careful balancing, especially given the spontaneous and peaceful nature of the original gathering.

Worked Example 1.3

A group known for violent protests applies to hold a procession in a community with recent tensions. The chief officer believes conditions would not prevent serious disorder and seeks a prohibition order.

Answer:
If imposing conditions is insufficient, the chief officer may lawfully seek a prohibition order (with Home Secretary approval) to ban processions in the area for up to three months. The grounds must be evidenced and the prohibition must be geographically and temporally limited as required by law.

Worked Example 1.4

An environmental group organises a stationary protest involving 30 people on private land (without permission) adjacent to a historic monument. The police, believing the assembly will cause serious disruption to the community and damage to the monument, seek prohibition.

Answer:
As this is an assembly of 20 or more people on land with no or only limited public access, which may result in serious disruption or damage to a historically significant site, the police may lawfully apply to prohibit the trespassory assembly under the CJPOA 1994. The prohibition area and period must not exceed statutory limits.

Worked Example 1.5

A demonstration is banned under POA 1986 s 13. The organisers challenge the ban, arguing it violates Article 11 ECHR as there is no genuine threat of serious disorder.

Answer:
A ban under s 13 POA 1986 must be proportionate and based on reasonable belief of serious public disorder. If the evidence for risk is insufficient or the restriction is overbroad, the courts may find the ban to be incompatible with Article 11 ECHR and quash the order.

Exam Warning

The police must justify any restrictions on processions or assemblies as necessary and proportionate. Overly broad or unjustified conditions may be challenged in court, especially where human rights are engaged. Judicial review is available for unlawful or disproportionate police action.

Revision Tip

Focus on the statutory requirements for advance notice, the threshold for imposing conditions versus prohibition, and the proportionality assessment. Practise analysing scenarios involving spontaneous protest, trespassory assemblies, and the different statutory powers.

Summary

Processions call for advance notice and may be subject to conditions on their route, timing, or participation, but may only be prohibited in defined, serious circumstances where conditions would be insufficient. Assemblies do not require advance notice, but are also subject to conditions where risks of disorder, damage, or disruption arise, with a higher threshold for the prohibition of trespassory assemblies. Any supervision, condition, or prohibition must meet proportionality and necessity standards, and all exercises of statutory discretionary power are open to judicial review, especially when the ECHR rights are engaged.

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The Public Order Act 1986 and subsequent statutes create a statutory regime balancing protest rights against public order and safety.
• Advance written notice is required for most public processions, enabling police to plan and impose conditions as needed; the duty does not always apply to spontaneous or customary events.
• The police may impose conditions on processions and assemblies to avert serious disorder, damage, disruption, or intimidation, but such conditions must be necessary, proportionate, and closely tailored to the risks.
• Processions may only be prohibited in exceptional circumstances and for a limited period, with local authority and Home Secretary approval. In London, the Commissioner may act directly with Secretary of State consent.
• Trespassory assemblies may be prohibited where there is a risk of serious disruption or damage at sites with restricted public access, subject to strict statutory limits on area and duration.
• All restrictions on the right to protest and assemble are reviewable for necessity, proportionality, and ECHR compatibility, with particular attention to Articles 10 and 11.
• Unjustified or excessive policing of protest may give rise to judicial review or human rights claims, and lack of notice alone does not automatically render a protest unlawful.
• The principle of proportionality is central to the legality of all restrictions and is fundamental when assessing police and state intervention in protest activity.

Key Terms and Concepts

• public procession
• public assembly
• trespassory assembly
• advance notice
• condition
• prohibition order
• serious disruption
• proportionality
• necessity (ECHR context)