Both Theresa May and Yvette Cooper referred to the events of Saturday as “violence”, but this also appeared to encompass the separable offences of assault and battery (offences against the person), aggravated trespass against land (where intention to produce a commotion must be proved), and criminal damage. The issue for the Home Secretary is how to allow the judiciary to punish and deter unlawful and illegal behaviour, and possibly to cause the legislature to enact new measures to deal with these new times of civil unrest at specific focal points.
The discussion led by May and Cooper was wide-ranging, and there was a very interesting aside which the Home Secretary said very quickly in passing. She referred to the Riot (Damages) Act 1896. However, according to a previous BBC article, it’s possible to use the Act the other way, such as Fortnum and Mason could in theory use the Act to recover money themselves for any damages from Saturday. For example, in reference to a previous claim, the BBC wrote,
“The claim is being made under the 1886 Riot Damages Act, which allows companies and individuals to sue the police over damage caused during civil disturbances.”
The issues about the said Act have never been properly resolved. Police authorities in 2002 had been trying to get the government to repeal the section of the 1886 act after disturbances in the north of England last summer. Bedfordshire Police Authority at that time resisted an attempt to make it pay £38m for the damage caused in the fire at the Yarl’s Wood immigration centre, arguing the bill is archaic and can no longer be justified. The original act was designed to charge the local police for failing to prevent people behaving in a “riotous or tumultuous” manner. It was also invoked after riots in Moss Side, Toxteth, London and Bristol in 1981.
The original Riot Act 1714, punishable ultimately by the death penalty, fell into misuse, and was in time superseded by the Public Order Act. It might seem odd that Theresa May is contemplating the enforcement of the Riot (Damages) Act 1896, in reference to the weekend’s events, two days’ ago. I suppose it would be possible in that it has never been repealed, and is in fairness younger than the Offences against the Person Act 1861 which governs assault and battery.
I don’t understand why Theresa May should wish to invoke the Damages Act? Lawyers are very keen at looking behind the purpose of any statutes enacted. The point about this statute is to charge the police for failing to prevent riots. However, Theresa May was (rightly) giving the impression that she fully supported the Metropolitan Police in upholding English justice in difficult circumstances.
The discussion is on the BBC iPlayer. “House of Commons” on the BBC iPlayer.
A brief (unreviewed) history of the Riot Act is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riot_Act
