Search

This article explores innovations in public order policing during Edinburgh’s Nato Parliamentary Assembly protests of 2009. When masked anarchist protesters gathered to ‘Smash Nato’, they were met by three plainclothes police negotiators rather than a line of public order officers. This article reflects on their attempts to interact with protestors and minimize disorder while ‘facilitating lawful protest’. We welcome the shift in attitudes and approach towards political protest, and draw on our observation of Nato and the 2010 Climate Camp to consider the efficacy of liaison policing tactics and the lessons to be learned. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Following the major riots within England in August 2011, the efficacy of public order police decision making was brought into a sharp focus. None the less, the reform of this mode of policing within the UK was already underway with a strong emphasis upon policing through consent and the need to facilitate peaceful protest through dialogue and communication. This paper reports upon a critical 'test case' for this 'new approach' by analysing the policing of a series of protests against Government policy across 3 days that surrounded a Government party conference in Sheffield, a large city in the north of England. This paper draws out lessons to be learned from what proved to be a highly successful dialogue-based approach to policing protests. We contend that dialogue and liaison were effective because they allowed for an ongoing dynamic risk assessment that improved command-level decision making and enhanced police proportionality. The subsequent impact upon crowd dynamics allowed for an improved capacity for proactive public order management, encouraged 'self-regulation' in the crowd, and avoided the unnecessary police use of force at moments of tension. The implications of the analysis for theory and practice are discussed. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper reports on innovations in public order policing during the protests surrounding the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) Parliamentary Assembly in Edinburgh, November 2009. When masked anarchist protesters determined to ‘smash NATO’ gathered on the streets on the first morning of the Assembly, they were initially confronted by three plainclothes police negotiators rather than a line of riot police. In this paper, we draw on empirical data to offer an analysis of these developments and gauge the extent to which they meet the stated intentions of the police to ‘facilitate lawful protest’. Whilst welcoming the shift in attitudes and approach towards political protest, we argue that the accent on facilitation in this operation ultimately appeared neither innovative nor effective in practice and frequently reverted to styles of policing designed to contain protest. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

In 2005, the location of the G8 summit meeting at Gleneagles, Scotland, brought the contested boundaries of the state and the nation to the fore. Confronted by the prospect of significant public disorder police forces in Scotland routinely flagged up a ‘Scottish approach to policing’. Drawing on research with key police officers and others we explore the processes through which national identities come to be articulated, contested and acted out in the context of one particular institution: the police. We consider the claim that policing of the summit was ‘Scottish’ and assess the implications of this assertion. Whilst the police have been argued to be integral to the constitution and expression of nation-statehood we highlight the dangers in an uncritical acceptance of police philosophies and also point to the banal ways in which national identity is naturalised. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Protests at recent international summit meetings have prompted assertions about 'global protest' and 'global civil society'. This article provides a detailed and contextualized analysis of the 2005 G8 summit in Scotland, focusing on the dynamic interplay between police and protestors. The authors argue that local variables were critical to the experience of this manifestation of 'global protest'. Focusing on the policing of events in Edinburgh, they highlight the preconceptions and assumptions (frames) underpinning police operations and contribute to a more interactive understanding of police-protestor relations. Protest emerges in relation to the 'polis' (simultaneously denoting both the political community and the police), and neglecting this relationship leads to incomplete analyses. In concluding, the authors consider the implications of their research for the policing of political protest. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides further analysis of an emerging ‘liaison’ based approach to the policing of public order in England and Wales (Gorringe, H., Stott, C. and Rosie, M. (2012). ‘Dialogue Police, Decision Making, and the Management of Public Order During Protest Crowd Events.’ Journal of Investigative Psychology and Offender Profiling 9(2): 111–125.). Data is gathered from a range of sources including direct observation of a series of six protest events across two cities in England between May and November 2012. The research was conducted using principles of ‘participant observation’ within an ‘action research’ framework (Lewin, K. (1958). Group Decision and Social Change. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.). The qualitative analysis suggests that liaison based approaches are effective where they enhance police capacity for problem solving, conflict reduction, limit setting, and mediating during protest events. It is asserted that liaison based tactics can be undermined, however, through poor understanding of the approach among police commanders and inadequate sensitivity to interactions between police tactics, protest identities, ideology, and history. The implications of the data for understanding wider debates concerning iterative processes between ‘transgressive’ protest and shifts toward strategic incapacitation are discussed (Gillham, P. F. (2011). ‘Securitizing America: strategic incapacitation and the policing of protest since the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks.’ Sociology Compass 5(7): 636–652.). [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]