Brian Haw loses court battle
By politics.co.uk
Brian Haw’s long-running protest in Parliament Square is set to come to an end after he lost a court battle on his presence in Westminster.
The peace campaigner has been camped outside parliament for a decade. He now has until March 28th to appeal.
Mr Haw is currently undergoing treatment for lung cancer in Germany and was not able to attend the high court for Mr Justice Wyn Williams’s ruling. Co-protester Barbara Tucker immediately said she would appeal.
London Mayor Boris Johnson said the eviction was the first step in his bid to clean up Parliament Square in time for the royal wedding.
The court judgement relates only to Parliament Square Gardens, which is owned by the Greater London Authority (GLA). Westminster Council, which owns the pavements, is currently trying to prove that Mr Haw is obstructing a public highway.
Comment: Boris has disgraced himself by evicting Brian Haw
The present case is just the latest attempt to have Mr Haw removed from the site.
David Blunkett even tried passing legislation specifically to deal with the protestor when he was home secretary, but a judge ruled it to be retrospective and therefore against natural justice.
Recently, a ‘democracy village’ was removed from Parliament Square, although many of the tents merely moved a few metres forward to the pavement.
That eviction followed a court of appeal judgement granted to mayor Boris Johnson by Mr Justice Griffith Williams.
Judges found that Mr Haw’s case was entirely separate, given his presence in the Square well before other demonstrators arrived.
A spokesman for the Mayor said: “The Mayor is pleased that the high court has supported previous rulings to return possession of Parliament Square Gardens to the Greater London Authority (GLA).
“The court of appeal had previously made a special case for Brian Haw and Barbara Tucker that they could continue to sleep on the grass area controlled by the GLA on a temporary basis while their case was referred back to the high court for conclusion in this matter.
“The high court has now concluded that neither party should be allowed to continue to sleep on the GLA controlled grass. The perimeter fences will be adjusted accordingly.”
