INTRODUCTION
There is currently a public enquiry in Canada examining whether the invocation of the Emergencies Act to end the “Trucker’s Freedom Protest” in Ottawa last year was legally justified. This protest was to force the government to end the vaccination mandate for truckers crossing the border to the U.S. It lasted from Jan. 28 to Feb. 20. The police did not intervene effectively until the Canadian Parliament invoked the Emergencies Act and the protest was dispersed.
This raises general questions about protests in democracies.
EXAMPLES OF OTHER RECENT PROTESTS AND THE POLICE RESPONSE
There have been many examples apart from the Trucker’s Freedom Protest”:
- In the UK, “Just Stop Oil” and “Insulate Britain” have been using a small number of protesters to stop traffic in and around London, with the protesters often super-gluing themselves to the road.
The police generally stand by since they are not authorized to remove the protesters until the Mayor of London deems that the protest is causing excessive disruption. In some cases, irate motorists have taken matters into their own hands and forcibly moved the protesters. A particular problem is that the penalties imposed are often not sufficient to deter repeat offences – there was an interview with a protester who had just been released from the police station as he was getting an Uber to get back to the protest. 
On January 6th, 2022, a crowd of protesters supporting ex-President Trump invaded the Capitol in Washington in an attempt to stop the ratification of the results of the November election. Capitol police were present but were greatly outnumbered and unable to prevent the storming of the Capitol. Order was restored when the National Guard arrived and a curfew was announced. Some of the protesters were charged and prosecuted many months later, based solely on video footage.
After the killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis by a white police officer, a series of large scale demonstrations were held in various U.S. cities, under the banner of “Black Lives Matter”. TV reports described these as largely peaceful, while the images on the screen showed vandalism, looting and arson. The police response was generally light, perhaps because the protests were focused on police brutality, with many protesters calling to “defund the police”.- In France, the government increases the taxes on gasoline as part of the effort to reach “net zero”. Protests throughout France ensued. Police responded with riot gear, tear gas and water cannon. However, the government rescinded the price increases.
In contrast, in authoritarian states protests are usually illegal and are quickly stopped by the police and military. For example, in Russia today protesting against the war in Ukraine can lead to lengthy prison sentences. Even calling the “Special Military Operation” a “war” can result in 15 years in prison.
PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH PROTESTS IN DEMOCRACIES
In democracies, there are a number of problems associated with the protests:
- Government capitulation – often the government gives in to the protesters demands. The result is that the protesters are afforded effective veto power over their particular issue, which may not be in the interest of the public at large.
- Economic cost – In Canada, the Financial Post had a list of resource projects costing $129 billion which are held up or cancelled due to protests. After construction, these projects will generate cash for decades in the future, providing high-paying jobs, profits for the companies and tax revenues for the various levels of government.
- Nuisance factor – the “Truckers Freedom Protest” paralysed the centre of Ottawa for several weeks, impacting businesses and residents in the area. The related protest at Coutts in Alberta closed of one of the major routes for trade between the U.S. and Canada. Sometimes, it is more than a nuisance factor and lives may be at stake – in the U.K., blockaded roads prevented emergency services from reaching hospitals, fires and other emergencies.
- Vigilantism – in the U.K. motorists have been taking matters into their own hands due to police inaction. Not only is this a dangerous development, but respect for the police has plummeted.
PROPER ROLE OF PROTESTS IN A DEMOCRACY
What is the proper role of protests in a democracy?
- Raise awareness of a single issue.
- Demonstrate the level of support for that issue.
These are necessary, since the main forms of voter expression in democracies is through elections. However, in elections, the candidates represent all the issues facing the country. No one agrees with a candidate or party on all issues. Citizens are often forced to vote for the candidate who “stinks the least”. Protests get around this limitation.
Although the right to protest is essential in a democracy, in recent years the power of protesters has grown to excessive levels. In many cases, protesters have a virtual veto over any issue.
DO PROTESTS ACCURATELY INDICATE THE SUPPORT FOR THE CAUSE
The case of environmentalists, whether they are against a certain development (e.g. a coal mine) or oil production or any other issue is illustrative. In most democratic countries there is a “green party”. Thus those for whom environmental issues are paramount can vote for the “Greens”. In the last election, in Canada the Greens got 6.5% of the vote and no elected officials. In Britain, the Green vote was only 2.7%. In no major European country did the Green vote exceed 10%; even in Germany, where through proportional representation the Greens have members in the Bundestag, their share was only 8.9%. This shows that although the environmentalists capture many headlines, their true support is quite weak.
WHAT IS ACCEPTABLE PROTEST
The failures of the authorities to deal with protests shows that there is a need to curb the excesses of the protesters and develop laws and strategies which are effective. Limits must be places and penalties must designed to deter the offences in the first place and eliminate repeat offences. However, the balance between limiting democratic protest while not degenerating into a police state is very fine. Under current circumstances some restrictions and effective enforcement of these restrictions is unfortunately, necessary.
A suitable model may be to allow:
- Static demonstrations in specified locations e.g. outside the Houses of Parliament. These should be of a predetermined length.
- Mass marches down a designated route, possibly followed by speeches.
In all cases the police should be informed beforehand so that they can muster the right manpower, set up road blocks and detours where necessary, CCTV surveillance etc.
What should not be allowed is interfering with others going about their lawful business. Weapons must not be carried and protesters should not evade responsibility by e.g. covering their faces.
PENALTIES FOR NOT COMPLYING WITH LAWS RESTRICTING PROTESTS
Any breach of these rules should be punished, with the punishments designed to prevent such breaches. Possibilities include:
- Fines – these are usually not effective because the fines will be paid by the organisations sponsoring the protest, which are often overseas trusts.
- Community service
- House arrest
- Jail time
Any attempt to resist arrest will result in increase penalties. Use of superglue, chains, not moving when requested so police officers have to carry the offender should count as resisting arrest. A repeat offence should result in immediate prison time.
Provisions should be made for large demonstrations, where there may be a need to arrest hundreds or even thousands of offenders. Police officers from other jurisdictions should be available, there might be a requirement for military assistance, buses for transportation, tents for temporary accommodation (with the “tent city” surrounded by barbed wire). Any arrests should be carried out at the time of the protest, not months later through costly examination of video footage.
To avoid long legal proceedings, the sentence should be reduced if the suspect pleads guilty within a certain time frame, in the same way most traffic violations never get to court.
CONCLUSION
The required laws restricting protests should be well publicized. They should be enforced rigorously and consistently, regardless of whether the government at any level is sympathetic to the “cause” or not.
If these recommendations are accepted, then the protesters can make their points. Other people are not greatly inconvenienced and economic costs, whether in direct policing or to the wider economy, are minimized.