Basildon defends prosecution of Dale Farm protesters

Basildon Council has defended its decision to prosecute 24 protesters who the local authority alleges obstructed bailiffs from clearing the Dale Farm site in October last year.

The local authority is bringing the case under s. 178 of the Town & Country Planning Act, with the defendants facing possible fines of up to £1,000 if found guilty.

Law firm Hodge Jones & Allen, which is acting for the protesters, has sent a letter to Basildon calling on it to review the matter and consider whether it is in the interests of justice or council taxpayers to continue.

Partner Raj Chada told Local Government Lawyer that the council had indicated that it would still be pursuing the action.

He said: “Obviously we think that is the wrong decision. We feel that this case will throw up a large number of complicated legal arguments and that it would not be in the interests of anyone to keep this case ongoing, particularly bearing in mind that it is in effect a private prosecution by Basildon Council rather than a Crown Prosecution Service prosecution.”

Chada added: “It is comparable with the Occupy London protests at St Paul’s. Those were CPS prosecutions, not City of London prosecutions, which they could have been. It was exactly the same charge of obstructing bailiffs, although under different legislation (the Criminal Justice Acts rather than the TCPA).”

The Hodge Jones Allen partner said there would be other issues such as considerations in relation to Articles 10 (the right to freedom of expression) and 11 (freedom of assembly) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

“Then there is the question of a local authority prosecuting those who are protesting against one of its key policies,” he said. “The CPS are bound by not only the Code for Crown Prosecutors but also the recently issued code by the Director of Public Prosecutions in relation to public protest. It seems to me to be not right that a private prosecution, albeit by a public authority, is not bound by those. [It is prosecuting] in effect its political opponents.”

Chada also claimed that the penalty would in effect be nominal and that Basildon's response was disproportionate. “It’s a fine-only case in terms of the legislation. The only thing that will happen is that huge costs will be incurred by both parties.”

The letter cited comments made by District Judge Woollard at a case management hearing on 10 May, where – according to the law firm – he observed that the site had now been cleared, the issue had been resolved and the offence carried a maximum penalty of a fine not exceeding level 3 on the standard scale.

The judge reportedly suggested that Basildon should reconsider whether the prosecution was in the public interest.

Hodge Jones Allen's letter also argued that "when taking into account the facts of the case, it cannot be said that prosecuting peaceful protestors for allegedly failing to do something is expedient for the promotion or protection of the inhabitants of the area".

It added: "Instead, we suggest that the promotion or protection of the interests of the inhabitants of the area would not be achieved by the continuation of this prosecution. Rather, inhabitants of the area would consider the £90 per hour legal fees being charged by the council for this prosecution to be a waste of scarce public resources, especially when considering the context of the nature and circumstance of the alleged offence."

Cllr Tony Ball, the council’s Leader, said: "The site clearance of Dale Farm was a difficult task carried out to ensure that the law was applied equally and fairly. This task was made more difficult by a number of protestors who obstructed council contractors trying to carry out their job. This is a criminal offence and the council felt that it was appropriate that cases were brought against these protestors, in both the interests of upholding the law and in the interests of local taxpayers.

"However, we are carefully considering the comments made by a judge in a recent hearing, along with representations received from solicitors. No decisions have yet been made on future cases."

Philip Hoult