Let EDL thugs demonstrate in Bradford

Our right to demonstrate is one of the pillars of democracy and more important than vague worries over 'community relations'

Members of the English Defence League (EDL) protest against Muslim fundamentalism in Stoke
Members of the English Defence League protest against Islamic fundamentalism in Stoke. Photograph: NTI Media Ltd/Rex Features

On 28 August the English Defence League plans to hold a massive demonstration in Bradford.

Locals aren't too happy and this week the Bradford Telegraph & Argus has launched a petition to persuade the home secretary to ban it. It says the EDL march would, "damage community relations and threaten the prosperity and harmony of the city". Local councillors agree.

The anti-fascist campaigners at Hope Not Hate have launched a campaign to stop the march in parallel. They have also released a video showing the violent tendencies and racist leanings of most of its supporters.

Needless to say, I'm not a fan. But on principle, and despite the immense respect I have for Hope Not Hate, I oppose banning the EDL demonstration. To explain why, let me take you back a few years.

In 1995, following protests by a large group of Sikhs in Birmingham, the controversial play Behzti was shut down. The protestors weren't directly culpable – they had a right to protest after all – for that act of censorship; it was the police that informed Birmingham Rep that they could no longer guarantee the safety of their staff. A lot of pressure from local councillors was also alleged. Five years later, when the author of that play tried to put on her next production, the police initially demanded £10,000 a day to protect the theatre – without a single threat being issued. Eventually they were negotiated down to nothing and the excellent production went ahead.

In recent years the police have repeatedly unlawfully stopped protests or brutally intimidated environmentalists.

The problem isn't just the police, it's our political culture. The Conservatives and New Labour have never been particularly enamoured of protecting civil liberties (though the influence of the Lib Dems on the coalition may change this) and have fallen over themselves in the past to give the police carte blanche. The media has the same hypocritical attitude: the rightwing press will rail against protests or complain about the cost of policing on certain occasions, but take up the cause of free speech and the right to insult people at other times.

We need cast-iron laws to protect these pillars of democracy: the right to demonstrate and protest without being shut down without very good cause; and an obligation on the police to provide support or protection regardless of the cost – as is the case in the United States.

The Telegraph & Argus's case against the English Defence League isn't watertight at all. Perhaps it will raise some tensions. But that isn't reason enough to restrict the right to demonstrate. It's incumbent on those local communities to talk to each other and not let the EDL divide them. Banning protests simply gives local councillors an excuse not to have to do the community engagement they'd have to otherwise.

Last, there's little doubt that the EDL are populated by thugs, with members threatening and intimidating people in Luton. And so we need more light shone on the organisation to expose its activities, rather than driving it underground. In this instance, protecting our right to demonstrate is far more important than vague worries that "community relations" will be damaged. Because when that right is curtailed, it is almost always hurts the most marginalised in society.


Your IP address will be logged

Comments in chronological order

Post a comment
  • This symbol indicates that that person is The Guardian's staffStaff
  • This symbol indicates that that person is a contributorContributor

Showing first 50 comments | Go to all comments | Go to latest comment

  • nufubar nufubar

    28 Jul 2010, 3:08PM

    Needless to say, I'm not a fan. But on principle, and despite the immense respect I have for Hope Not Hate, I oppose banning the EDL demonstration.

    I'm pleased by this, although I suspect that the banning brigade will win by claiming a risk of public disorder.

    Freedom of speech means letting the unpleasant, the odious & the repellent speak as well as the people we like to hear, for if it does not then it means nothing.

  • CharleySays CharleySays

    28 Jul 2010, 3:10PM

    This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:14PM

    SunnyH

    I've seen the vids for this group of violent, vicious bastrads and I think you are serkiously misguided in your supporting their 'democratic right' to hold a mass demonstration in Bradford - this isn't about 'rights' or political thought, this is the equivalent of the NF in the 70's - marching into areas with the sole purpose of rioting and attacking people of differing races.

    This is motivated purely by the politics of hate, violence and intimdation and I believe the 'demonstration' (if one can call it that) should be stopped.

    If you are so confident of the democratic rights of the EDL - then perhaps you should offer to stand on the front line in Bradford as they march past? I can tell you, as a man with a brown skin you might get your head cracked open.

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:16PM

    nufubar:

    Freedom of speech means letting the unpleasant, the odious & the repellent speak as well as the people we like to hear, for if it does not then it means nothing.

    So if the march was to go through Stamford Hill, with the EDL supporters wearing Swatikas and giving Nazi salutes - you'd be OK with that?

  • Tetleyteaman Tetleyteaman

    28 Jul 2010, 3:18PM

    If this march goes ahead (and I somehow think it will get banned - after all, Bradford can't even have a St George's Day Parade now) it will be the EDL that need protecting.

    The town centre is a dump anyway, but I would not want to be anywhere near it. You will have the UAF counter march as well as all the local Muslim youths coming down agitating for a fight.

    We do not need another riot in Bradford.

  • whitesteps whitesteps

    28 Jul 2010, 3:19PM

    CliffordChallenger

    "We who live in Bradford also have a right not to be shamed by the EDL "

    I'm sorry, but you really don't. Nobody has a 'right' not to be shamed. There is no law about this, mainly as being 'shamed' is a completely subjective position.

    The right that exists at the core of this country is the right to speak freely without fear of censorship or persecution as a result of your opinions.

    The only right you have to counter is the right to take to the streets yourself in a show of solidarity against these idiots. You have the right to write to the press, exposing their ignorance and brutish tactics. You have the right to answer their ludicrous and poorly constructed arguments, in such a way as might 'shame' them. Those are your rights. They do not include silencing others, just because they are ignorant.

    Free speech should never be the preserve of those we happen to agree with.

  • venerablejohn venerablejohn

    28 Jul 2010, 3:19PM

    The Telegraph & Argus's case against the English Defence League isn't watertight at all. Perhaps it will raise some tensions. But that isn't reason enough to restrict the right to demonstrate. It's incumbent on those local communities to talk to each other and not let the EDL divide them. Banning protests simply gives local councillors an excuse not to have to do the community engagement they'd have to otherwise.

    The problem is Sunny that regardless of the wrongs or rights on the right to hold a demonstration in Bradford, the fact remains, this is an attempt to cause civic unrest. Its ok saying that the local community need to engage with each other, but none of the EDL will be from the local community which, in general, get on ok. The last time outsiders came into Bradford - the NF/BNP marches back in 2001 it was a catalist for some of the worse rioting in post-war Britain. Whilst it might be a useful scientific excercise to test if Bradford as a community has been able to "move on" from those scenes, but its a hell of a risk. I would not expect the Islamic Forum of Europe to come and demonstrate in all white housing estates in any major City in the UK without causing huge civic unrest, and if they came near my house I would certainly be telling them what they could do with their sharia law and European caliphate, so lets not pretend that its up to the Asian community to restrain itself from reacting to provocation.

  • Damntheral Damntheral

    28 Jul 2010, 3:21PM

    Five years later, when the author of that play tried to put on her next production, the police initially demanded £10,000 a day to protect the theatre

    "A fine little theatre you have here, Squire... Wouldn't want anything happening to it, would we now?"

  • DisobeyMurdoch DisobeyMurdoch

    28 Jul 2010, 3:23PM

    If the EDL are allowed to march in the name of 'free speech', then it could be argued that the Islamic hate preachers should be allowed to shout abuse at soldiers too.

    Anyway, the leader of the EDL has been arrested on charges related to mortgage fraud. Once the penny drops that EDL member donations are perhaps not going to their intended 'cause', then I can forsee the EDL imploding. Good job too.

  • raymonddelauney raymonddelauney

    28 Jul 2010, 3:23PM

    Last, there's little doubt that the EDL are populated by thugs, with members threatening and intimidating people in Luton. And so we need more light shone on the organisation to expose its activities, rather than driving it underground.

    Blair's evil inheritance. His real legacy if you like. A bunch of ugly knuckle-scraping chumps from lower-league football.

    Luton and their squalid hardcore nutters never did get-over being relegated from the league.

  • pmantis pmantis

    28 Jul 2010, 3:23PM

    As long as no threat of violence is displayed or there actions do not infringe on any other persons personal freedoms, then they or anyone else should be free to do as they want.

  • MrDees MrDees

    28 Jul 2010, 3:25PM

    oh Sunny you'll learn.
    i hear that a lot of people with an Indian background, especially Sikh , sympathise with the EDL but here is how it goes: right now it's the Muslims, then who do you think is next. a lot of these members are football hooligans who do not like people in the next town. your turn will come before the Welsh, the Scots, the Cornish etc. wake up!

  • OneManIsAnIsland OneManIsAnIsland

    28 Jul 2010, 3:26PM

    "If the EDL are allowed to march in the name of 'free speech', then it could be argued that the Islamic hate preachers should be allowed to shout abuse at soldiers too."

    That's good, because it was, and they were.

  • whitesteps whitesteps

    28 Jul 2010, 3:28PM

    LaRitournelle

    "So if the march was to go through Stamford Hill, with the EDL supporters wearing Swatikas and giving Nazi salutes - you'd be OK with that?"

    Of course not. If such a march happened near my home, I'd be furious. And I expect that the people of Bradford are furious (the article and some comments above suggest so).

    That doesn't mean it's right to stop it. You can't tell people that they're not allowed political expression because it might upset people. I find a great deal of Centrist-Right politics sickening, but that doesn't mean I get to demand it be banned.

    Nobody is saying anything about being "OK" with anything. If the people of Bradford object, their recourse is to peacefully march together in solidarity (and far greater numbers) condemning the opinions of these idiots.

    When Nick Griffin came to my town, this is exactly what we did. He was allowed to enter the place he was set to speak, but we were outside, making sure he knew he wasn't welcome, the community as a whole was hostile, and that just because he was travelling with two guys much taller than him, we were not afraid.

    People often forget this. Freedom of expression works both ways, and it's often the best weapon we have.

  • ThermoStat ThermoStat

    28 Jul 2010, 3:28PM

    It's not about "community relations" it's about the EDL's record of violently assaulting non-whites and smashing up their homes, businesses, etc on violent rampages.

    On environmentalist demonstrations people are given training on non-violent direct action. On EDL demonstrations people give Nazi salutes and aim to inflict violence on those they don't like. There is no parallel.

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:30PM

    Whitesteps:

    They do not include silencing others

    I'm afraid that if the sole purpose of an organisation is to incite racial and religious hatred (Muslims only) descend on a town with a large Muslim population with the direct objective of 'silencing' others by beating them into a pulp - then that I'm afraid is the antithiesis of 'free speech' and should, quite rightly be stopped.

  • haardvark haardvark

    28 Jul 2010, 3:31PM

    If the EDL are allowed to march in the name of 'free speech', then it could be argued that the Islamic hate preachers should be allowed to shout abuse at soldiers too.

    AFIAK they did. In fact they were treated extremely leniently when their protests crossed the line into direct threats and incitement.

  • ZacSmith ZacSmith

    28 Jul 2010, 3:31PM

    disobeymurdoch

    If the EDL are allowed to march in the name of 'free speech', then it could be argued that the Islamic hate preachers should be allowed to shout abuse at soldiers too.

    Er.... they are and they do?

  • Ilovemisty Ilovemisty

    28 Jul 2010, 3:33PM

    I agree with Sunny, but I have to take issue with this little bit of apologism:

    The protestors weren't directly culpable – they had a right to protest after all – for that act of censorship

    They had the right to protest, not violently attack a theatre busy hosting families and kids at a pantomime.

    @MrDees

    i hear that a lot of people with an Indian background, especially Sikh , sympathise with the EDL but here is how it goes: right now it's the Muslims, then who do you think is next. a lot of these members are football hooligans who do not like people in the next town. your turn will come before the Welsh, the Scots, the Cornish etc. wake up!

    So we should ban the protests of Islamists and supporters of Hamas, after all first it was the Jews, then Fatah...etc? Apply the same rules to all fascists, white or black.

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:34PM

    If the people of Bradford object, their recourse is to peacefully march together in solidarity (and far greater numbers) condemning the opinions of these idiots.

    Whitesteps:

    I can see your point, but the fact of the matter is, this is not about the 'right' to demonstrate, it's about the 'right to violently intimidate' and it has nothing to do with free speech and I would, as a citizen of Bradford, fully expect the law to be invoked to prevent a deliberate attempt to provoke a riot, trash my town and leave people injured.

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:36PM

    This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
  • whitesteps whitesteps

    28 Jul 2010, 3:37PM

    LaRitournelle

    I do not believe that you can stop a march because you believe that it might lead to violence. It's my belief that current Tory policies might well lead to mass protests and violence on the streets within the next two years - that is not a compelling argument for forcibly dismantling the Tories immediately (as much as I can't help but like the idea).

    If there is reasonable grounds to believe that violence is likely, sufficient police should be on standby to react and protect the law abiding, should it be needed.

    And if violence does ensue, then I'm quite happy to turn a blind eye to whatever tactics the police favour in stopping them, as well as using the full extent of the legal system to punish them for it - that is something they have brought down on themselves.

    I believe the EDL has its right to free speech, not a free hand in Bradford.

  • dolphinx dolphinx

    28 Jul 2010, 3:37PM

    As someone points out if we allow the EDL to march we should also allow extremists to verbally abuse our returning soldiers.

    I have no problem in banning marches and demonstrations whose sole objective is to incite race hatred and promote violence against ethnic minorites.

    To those liberals that defend the absolute right of free speech I say I see no problem in banning the likes of the EDL or BNP when their ultimate goal is the overthrow of our liberal values (including free speech) and the imposition of an authoritarian fascist state.

    Do not pander to these vile neanderthals..... Ban the BNP and the EDL now.

  • tapout tapout

    28 Jul 2010, 3:37PM

    I absolutely think they should be allowed to protest. They are protesting against Islamism - not Islam - but a dangerous fundamentalist ideology. In other words they are protesting against fascism. Good.

  • DisobeyMurdoch DisobeyMurdoch

    28 Jul 2010, 3:38PM

    @Zac Smith OneManIsAnIsland

    So you support the right for the now banned Islam4uk to protest at soldiers' homecoming?

    There's free speech - and there's taking the piss. Both Islam4UK and the EDL fall into the latter category - the only difference is that Islam4UK have been banned.

  • Sweeting Sweeting

    28 Jul 2010, 3:38PM

    We need cast-iron laws to protect these pillars of democracy: the right to demonstrate and protest without being shut down without very good cause; and an obligation on the police to provide support or protection regardless of the cost – as is the case in the United States.

    You mean this United States?

  • KettsOak KettsOak

    28 Jul 2010, 3:39PM

    Clifford - you certainly have a right not to have a riot in your city centre, or property damaged - but banning people from protesting as Sunny has done a good job of explaining is not a good idea.

    Why not have the police cordon them off, surround them and then get everyone in the town to ignore them. Rathe then a counter demo maybe the Anti-fascists could walk amongst the normal shopping crowd handing out some information leaflets. Then they get to communicate their message without having to worry about the EDL yobs taking a pop at them.

    Give them no publicity - which is oxygen to their fire. if the press ignore them and the public ignore them they will look like a bunch if idiots standing around in the rain (well we can only hope for the rain part).

  • Ilovemisty Ilovemisty

    28 Jul 2010, 3:40PM

    @dolphinx

    Do not pander to these vile neanderthals..... Ban the BNP and the EDL now.

    Does that apply to the Islamist neanderthals as well? They are not to big a fan of liberal values or free speech are they?

  • englishhermit englishhermit

    28 Jul 2010, 3:40PM

    Contributor Contributor

    English Defence League. Hahahaha. They couldn't defend themselves out of a wet paper bag.

    Defence requires intelligence based upon patient, quiet and disciplined observation. So they are scuppered straight away.

    If they really want to defend England, let them join the armed services. Not much chance there either. They are too fat and unfit. In any case, they might fall over and graze their knees and Mummy won't be there to kiss it better.

    The EDL is a refuge for stupid ugly people - men who can't get laid except by stupid ugly sour faced women (have you ever seen a tasty looking BNP/EDL bird? No.) so they take their frustrations out on people they perceive to be vulnerable and all this is whipped up and exploited by some rather nasty right wing extremists.

    The best course of action is to let them have their demo but without any counter demo whatsoever. Then send the army in to show them how it's done.

  • tapout tapout

    28 Jul 2010, 3:41PM

    I can tell you, as a man with a brown skin you might get your head cracked open.

    I'm pretty sure that the head of the EDL, Guramit Singh, a 'brown' Sikh, would resent that.

  • whitesteps whitesteps

    28 Jul 2010, 3:42PM

    LaRitournelle

    I would, as a citizen of Bradford, fully expect the law to be invoked to prevent a deliberate attempt to provoke a riot, trash my town and leave people injured.

    I fully expect the law to be used in this way too, during the march. I would expect the police to be out in force, ready to respond to any racially-motivated violence with equal force (if we are stuck with a police force full of thugs, it would be nice, just once, to feel they are brutalising some young men who really do deserve it).

  • Neptunian Neptunian

    28 Jul 2010, 3:42PM

    It's not about "community relations" it's about the EDL's record of violently assaulting non-whites and smashing up their homes, businesses, etc on violent rampages.

    The EDL doesn't have such a record. The majority of the violence at EDL demos has stemmed from the UAF protesters. As unpleasant as the EDL might be, they have not engaged in large-scale racist violence or intimidation. Sunny's link only speaks of a stand-off between the EDL and other protesters, and does not contain any evidence of EDL supporters threatening or intimidating anyone.

  • YorkshireCat YorkshireCat

    28 Jul 2010, 3:42PM

    All local political parties, the local paper and local businesses support the banning of the EDl provocation. Sunny, from his chatterati tower in London knows better.

    The whole purpose of the EDL event is to try to incite a repeat of the Bradford riot. Strangely, the people of that city would rather not have this happen. Seems eminently reasonable to me.

  • JohnYardDog JohnYardDog

    28 Jul 2010, 3:43PM

    @ dolphinx

    To those liberals that defend the absolute right of free speech I say I see no problem in banning the likes of the EDL or BNP when their ultimate goal is the overthrow of our liberal values (including free speech) and the imposition of an authoritarian fascist state.

    Is the best way to defeat authoritarian fascists becoming like them?

  • dolphinx dolphinx

    28 Jul 2010, 3:44PM

    @whitesteps,

    There will not be sufficient police available... not only are the EDL made up of football hooligans, I stronlgy suspect there may be a few off-duty coppers amongst their ranks.

    P.S. As for turning a blind eye to police brutality, I thought that was the job of the CPS and the Attorney General ???

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:44PM

    Whitesteps:

    It's my belief that current Tory policies might well lead to mass protests and violence on the streets within the next two years - that is not a compelling argument for forcibly dismantling the Tories immediately (as much as I can't help but like the idea).

    We're singing from the same hymnsheet there!

    I believe the EDL has its right to free speech, not a free hand in Bradford.

    OK, put like that I agree with you, but the fact remains, this is not about exercising 'rights' or 'free speech' - this is rent-a-mob going on the rampage to attack Muslims in Bradford. What we should be examining is the rise of these sorts of groups in the UK and in Europe. The EDL is the organised mob-wing of the BNP.

  • Koolio Koolio

    28 Jul 2010, 3:45PM

    @CliffordChallenger: "No no no. Not in my city. We who live in Bradford also have a right not to be shamed by the EDL or have another riot here."
    Not in your backyard eh? Whilst I appreciate some towns and cities can have particular sensitivities, the argument here is more about democracy, free speech and the right to assemble and protest. Because as Hundal says, what if government finds other groups awkward and bans them, such as anti-war supporters etc?

  • Tinfoilhatter Tinfoilhatter

    28 Jul 2010, 3:46PM

    Although I believe in the right of the EDL to march I was in Bradford when
    the far right demonstrated back in 2001. That precipitated a really nasty riot which created a lot divisions among people in the city.

    Consequently I would rather it not go ahead.

  • Bubblecar Bubblecar

    28 Jul 2010, 3:46PM

    This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted.
  • storygirl storygirl

    28 Jul 2010, 3:47PM

    Banning this has nothing to do with freedom of speech.The EDL are free to spout their hate,but they are not free to bring violence to the streets of another city.

  • LaRitournelle LaRitournelle

    28 Jul 2010, 3:48PM

    tapout:

    They are protesting against Islamism - not Islam - but a dangerous fundamentalist ideology

    I'd love to know how many of their members would be able to distinguish Islamism from Islam? Or a Sikh from Hindu from a Muslim for that matter.

Showing first 50 comments | Go to all comments | Go to latest comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and signed in.

|

Comments

Sorry, commenting is not available at this time. Please try again later.

Latest posts

Free P&P at the Guardian bookshop

    • Hancox
    • £20.00 with free UK delivery
    • Plenty
    • £25.00 with free UK delivery