After Sir Keir Starmer calls on protesters to “respect” those mourning the Queen, and not “ruin” their opportunity, lets also respect others that do not offer their deference.

 

 Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer signs the Proclamation of Accession of King Charles III.

Labour  leader Sir Keir Starmer formerly a human rights lawyer has urged protesters to “respect” those mourning the Queen, and not “ruin” their opportunity to say a private “thank you” to the late monarch.

He added that he  will return to Westminster Hall with his family to personally pay his respects at the lying in state after he joins the committee receiving the coffin in a professional capacity.

He said the country’s response to the Queen’s death has been “very moving”, and encouraged those who might want to protest to be considerate of people’s grief.

This announcement  came after activist on Tuesdays gathered outside St Giles’ Cathedral in Edinburgh carrying “blank canvases” to protest in solidarity against several arrests that have been made in relation to incidents during royal ceremonies.

Police Scotland have a few people in connection with allegedly breaching the peace following separate incidents earlier in the week. 

A woman was arrested and charged after an incident at the Accession Proclamation of King Charles III in Edinburgh on Sunday.after appeared in the crowd opposite the Mercat Cross, holding a placard denouncing imperialism and stating ‘abolish monarchy’.

One person shouted: ‘Let her go, it’s free speech,’ while others yelled: ‘Have some respect.’

Hecklers were also heard booing during the event.

Police Scotland said a 22-year-old is due to appear at Edinburgh Sheriff Court at a later date.

Another man has also been arrested and charged in connection to breach of the peace during the Queen's procession.

A 22-year-old was also detained after the Duke of York, Prince Andrew, was abused as he walked behind his mother’s coffin.

Social media videos showed a man shouting at Andrew before bystanders pulled him to the ground.

The man was released by police on an undertaking to appear at Edinburgh Sheriff Court at a later date.

A third man Symon Hill, 45, got accosted by police after shouting ‘who elected him?’ during the events proclaiming the accession to the throne of King Charles III.

A protester bearing a handmade sign saying “not my King” was also spoken to by police and escorted away from the Palace of Westminster in London. 

The history tutor told The Guardian: ‘I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone arrested on such threadbare grounds, let alone experienced it myself.

‘I didn’t in any meaningful sense disrupt the ceremony.’

Thames Valley police said a 45-year-old man was arrested ‘in connection with a disturbance that was caused during the county proclamation ceremony of King Charles III in Oxford’, and was later ‘de-arrested’.

The man was arrested under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986 – referring to behaviour deemed likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress.

Paul Powlesland, 36, a barrister and nature rights activist from Barking in east London, said he was warned by police he would be arrested if he wrote ‘not my king’ on a placard. 

He travelled to London yesterday afternoon with ‘a blank piece of paper’, and recorded part of a conversation where an officer suggested he would be detained if he wrote down the phrase.

The video went viral on social media, and was viewed 700,000 times in four hours.

He said: ‘I went down there because I’ve been increasingly concerned by people who are just, you know, exercising rights to freedom of speech, being either arrested or threatened with arrest by the police.

‘An officer came up to me and began that conversation effectively asking for my details and then saying, if you write ‘not my King’ on it, then we may well arrest you for public order offences, being offensive.’

Asked about the police response to those wishing to protest, Sir Keir Starmer told BBC Breakfast: “The word I’d use around that issue is ‘respect’.

“I think if people have spent a long time waiting to come forward to have that moment as the coffin goes past, or whatever it may be, I think: respect that, because people have made a huge effort to come and have that private moment to say thank you to Queen Elizabeth II.

“Obviously we have to respect the fact that some people disagree. One of the great British traditions is the ability to protest and to disagree, but I think if it can be done in the spirit of respect

“Respect the fact that hundreds of thousands of people do want to come forward and have that moment, don’t ruin it for them.” 

Surely even members of society who are currently  deeply mourning the loss of the Queen can surely see the hypocrisy and irony of the situation,even when public sensitivities are at an all time high but on   Monday we will see food banks closed, funerals postponed, cancer scans cancelled, for some of us for these reasons,  alone the enforced  national mourning of the Queen is getting out of hand and over the top with a breathless non-stop coverage over the most minute events that has carried on unabated since the announcement of the 96 year old  Queens sad but peaceful demise.

And the proclamation that a man who is now sovereign over us subjects purely because he happened to be born, is deeply political and more than anything underlines peoples inherent right to protest both legally and morally. Indeed, should  be encouraged in any  rational society.The right to protest is all about disruption and making a big noise and we should respect the many who are sick to the back teeth of all the fawning coverage and embarrassing deference to the whole privileged lot of them. Republic, a group campaigning for Britain to have an elected head of state, condemned the "automatic accession"  and called for a "national debate on the future of the monarchy".

In a statement, Graham Smith, CEO of Republic, commented: "While we recognize that many people are reflecting on the loss of the Queen, Britain does need a debate on the future of the monarchy in light of King Charles' accession to the throne.

"A proclamation of a new king is an affront to democracy, a moment that stands firmly against the values most of us believe in, values such as equality, accountability and the rule of law.

"Britain has changed almost beyond recognition since 1952 and the last royal succession. In this modern and democratic society our head of state cannot simply step into the role without debate or without challenge to his legitimacy."

Smith said support for the monarchy had "to a large extent been buoyed" by Elizabeth II's personal appeal during her reign.

"We believe Britain needs to move to a democratic alternative to the hereditary monarchy. We believe that debate must start now," he concluded.

I believe it is seriously worrying that holding a sign saying not my king can get you removed by police. What ever your views on the monarchy, this should  seriously concern you.Where  for instance is the respect for groups such as Indigenous peoples and others who were subject to dispossession and oppression by the British monarchy who  may wish to express important political views about there significant and continuing injustices who do not respect the  life of unfettered privilege that the Queen enjoyed from the cradle to the grave, known for living in palaces and spending  money like water, and  disrespectful  to families struggling to make ends meet, Some commentators  have also pointed out  the vast disparity between the Queen's opulence  and the real life situations of her subjects.Though she remained popular,there seems little space for nuance or critique for this symbol of coloniality and imperialism whose wealth was accrued and built on the backs an blood of  African and Indigenous people. Not only is it seen as impolite to criticize the revisionist propaganda, it is now apparently dangerous to question the automatic ascension  of Charle as king.

It may be uncomfortable or even distressing for those wishing to publicly grieve the queen’s passing to see anti-monarchy placards displayed. But that doesn’t make it a criminal offence that allows protestors to be arrested.

The ability to voice dissent is vital for a functioning democracy. It’s therefore arguable that people should be able to voice their concerns with the monarchy even in this period of heightened sensitivity. The only way in which anti-monarchy sentiment can lawfully be suppressed is in a state of emergency. A public period of mourning does not meet that standard. Whatever your  views on the monarchy you should be able to express them in public without risking arrest oe intimidation by police officers. Thi is freedom of speech at its most basic. 

Protest is not a gift from the state , it is a fundamental right. and part of a healthy and functioning democracy. Please sign the following petition to oppose the Public Order Bill ad stand up for free Expression.https://action.libertyhumanrights.org.uk/page/106448/petition/1?ea.url.id=6062323  

Meanwhile, Charles  appears to be defying efforts to redeem his image  Deliciously insightful videos have been circulating online displaying  his pompous and arrogant ways, in one he displays his foul temper with an outburst at a leaky pen, and in another he dismissively waves at stationary to be taken of his desk, rather than move it himself, and for a long rime has been shamed for his contemptuous disregard for animal rights, as is the  case  for many other  members of his family. If you want to protest against the monarchy.These are your rights.https://netpol.org/2022/09/15/want-to-protest-against-the-monarchy-these-are-your-rights/

,