Introduction
Breach of the peace is a central concept in public order law, derived from common law, involving actions that harm or are likely to harm individuals or property, or that instill fear of such harm through disturbances like assault or riot. Defined in R v Howell [1982] QB 416, it outlines the conditions under which law enforcement can act to prevent disorder. The core principles focus on actual or potential harm, the likelihood of violence, and reasonable apprehension of harm, forming the basis for police powers to maintain public order.
Understanding Breach of the Peace
At common law, breach of the peace involves actions causing harm or likely to cause harm to a person, or in their presence, their property, or actions that put someone in fear of such harm being done. The definition was clarified in the case of R v Howell [1982] QB 416, where Lord Justice Watkins stated:
"There is a breach of the peace whenever harm is actually done or is likely to be done to a person or in their presence to their property, or a person is in fear of being so harmed through an assault, an affray, a riot, unlawful assembly or other disturbance."
This definition emphasizes two main points:
- Actual or Potential Harm: The harm can be physical damage or injury to persons or property.
- Reasonable Fear of Harm: Even if no harm occurs, actions that cause a person to fear harm can constitute a breach.
Breach of the peace is not a criminal offence itself but grants police certain powers to act to prevent such disturbances.
Key Case Law
R v Howell [1982] QB 416
This case provided the authoritative definition of breach of the peace, outlining the circumstances under which police can intervene. It established that a breach occurs with actual or likely harm or reasonable fear of harm.
Laporte v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire [2006] UKHL 55
In this case, the House of Lords considered the legality of police actions in preventing breaches of the peace during protests. It highlighted the need for proportionality in police interventions and set limits on preventive measures.
Foulkes v Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [1998] 3 All ER 705
This case examined the extent of police powers to enter private premises without a warrant to prevent a breach of the peace. It emphasized that such entry must be necessary and proportionate.
Steel v United Kingdom (1998) 28 EHRR 603
The European Court of Human Rights considered whether arrests for breach of the peace violated Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights (right to liberty and security). The court underscored the importance of legality and proportionality in such arrests.
Police Powers Relating to Breach of the Peace
Arrest Without Warrant
Police officers have the authority to arrest individuals without a warrant if they reasonably believe a breach of the peace is occurring or is about to occur. The key considerations include:
- Reasonable Belief: There must be genuine and reasonable grounds for the belief.
- Prevention: The arrest is aimed at preventing the breach.
- Necessity and Proportionality: The action taken must be necessary and proportionate to the threat.
Entry onto Private Premises
In certain circumstances, police may enter private property without a warrant to prevent a breach of the peace. This power is limited and must meet specific criteria:
- Immediacy: There is an immediate threat of a breach occurring on the premises.
- Necessity: Entering is necessary to prevent harm.
- Proportionality: The intrusion must be proportionate to the seriousness of the threat.
Dispersal Powers
Under the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014, police have powers to disperse individuals or groups to prevent anti-social behavior or disorder. These powers include:
- Direction to Leave: Requiring individuals to leave a specified area for up to 48 hours.
- Seizure of Items: Confiscating items that could be used to cause disturbance.
- Area Specification: The powers apply within a designated area authorized by a senior officer.
These measures aim to prevent situations from escalating into breaches of the peace.
Human Rights Considerations
The exercise of police powers to prevent breaches of the peace must be balanced against individual rights under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR):
- Article 5: Right to liberty and security.
- Article 10: Freedom of expression.
- Article 11: Freedom of assembly and association.
Actions taken by law enforcement must be:
- Lawful: In accordance with domestic law.
- Necessary: Required in a democratic society for public safety.
- Proportionate: Balanced against the rights of individuals.
Failing to observe these considerations can result in violations, as highlighted in Steel v United Kingdom.
Practical Applications
Understanding how these principles apply in real life helps in understanding their significance. Consider the following example:
Example Scenario
A group of environmental activists gathers peacefully in a public park to protest against deforestation. As the crowd grows, a few individuals start blocking a nearby road, causing traffic disruptions. Some drivers become agitated, and the situation begins to escalate.
Analysis
- Assessment of Threat: The actions of blocking the road create a risk of harm due to potential confrontations or accidents.
- Police Intervention: Officers may decide to intervene to prevent a breach of the peace.
- Use of Powers:
- Dispersal: Directing individuals to leave the area to prevent escalation.
- Arrest Without Warrant: If the threat is immediate and serious.
- Human Rights Balance: The intervention must respect the activists' rights to assemble and express their views while ensuring public safety.
Conclusion
Breach of the peace integrates complex legal doctrines involving common law principles, statutory provisions, and human rights obligations. It requires careful analysis of actual or potential harm, reasonable fear, and the proportionality of police actions. Key cases like R v Howell establish the foundational definition, while Laporte v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire sets limitations on preventive measures. The interaction between police powers—such as arrest without warrant, entry onto private premises, and dispersal orders—and individual rights under the ECHR highlights the delicate balance in maintaining public order. Strict adherence to legal requirements is necessary when exercising these powers to prevent unlawful breaches. Understanding the interrelation of these elements ensures the precise application of the law in situations where breaches of the peace may occur.
