‘We need to go further’: Starmer weighs crackdown on chants at pro-Palestine marches

Several senior politicians criticised the Metropolitan Police for allowing the demonstrations to take place, including by a group calling itself Intifada 87.

Labour MP Joani Reid, who chairs the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) against antisemitism said it was “deeply concerning” that the group gathered outside Downing Street.

She claimed: “The name [of the group] is not accidental – it’s a deliberate reference to the year Hamas was founded.”

"The Met have serious questions to answer about how and why this was permitted to go ahead”, she added.

Her concerns were echoed by Lord Walney, the government’s former independent adviser on political violence.

"What on Earth is the Met doing allowing a protest on the anniversary of October 7 by a group whose very name signals support for the terrorists who carried out that terrible massacre of Jewish people?,” he asked.

“There is a lot of hand-wringing about the police being put in a difficult position by the lack of clear laws to prevent damaging protests, but there are clearly a raft of powers available to stop this carnival of Hamas glorification and hatred.”

He continued: “The home secretary should be demanding an immediate explanation from Sir Mark Rowley over this failure to take a stand against vile Islamist hate designed to further intimidate Jewish people in Britain."

On Sunday, Shabana Mahmood announced that she was bringing forward new powers for police forces to consider the “cumulative impact” of repeat protests and, if necessary, give them the power to restrict them.

If protests caused repeated disorder, the police will have the authority to, for example, instruct organisers to hold the event somewhere else.

Mahmood said at the weekend: “Large, repeated protests can leave sections of our country, particularly religious communities, feeling unsafe, intimidated and scared to leave their homes. This has been particularly evident in relation to the considerable fear within the Jewish community, which has been expressed to me on many occasions in these recent difficult days.

“These changes mark an important step in ensuring we protect the right to protest while ensuring all feel safe in this country.”
Reacting to the criticism from Reid and Walney, a Met Police spokesperson told the JC: “The police do not give permission for protests, nor do we have any power in law to refuse permission either. We do have the power to impose conditions under the Public Order Act on things like start and end points, routes or timings in order to prevent serious disruption and/or serious disorder.

“Only the Home Secretary has the power to ban a protest march, but only on request from the police in circumstances when it is anticipated that a protest would cause disorder that is so serious it cannot be dealt with by police intervention alone. This is a very high bar and not one that has been met at any point in recent years.

They added: “On Tuesday we imposed conditions to move the start point of the protest away from Portland Place, given its close proximity to a nearby synagogue. We did so recognising that the protest was taking place on the anniversary of the October 7 attacks and acknowledging the impact on Jewish Londoners of an unprecedented period of almost constant protest over the past two years.

“We understand the concerns raised about the name of the group that organised the protest, including the suggestion that it could be interpreted as being supportive of the proscribed organisation, Hamas.

"While previous instances of implied or non-explicit support have been found not to meet the threshold for a criminal offence, we are reviewing the circumstances in this case, including seeking advice from the Crown Prosecution Service, to determine whether any offences may have been committed.”

The Home Office has been contacted for comment.