'From the River to the sea' chant is ‘close to the legal line' but police won't make arrests, says Met Commissioner
The police chief admitted that the current laws were "frustrating" and backed an independent review on the current public order and hate crime legislation
Met Police commissioner Sir Mark Rowley admitted he was frustrated that his officers cannot arrest pro-Palestine supporters who chant "from the river to the sea".
Listen to this article
Speaking to Nick Ferrari during a phone-in on LBC, Sir Mark said the slogan came "close to the legal line", but did not surpass any thresholds for the Met to detain anyone.
He admitted that the current laws were "frustrating" and backed an independent review on the current public order and hate crime legislation, which was launched this week.
Read more: Met chief hits back at Donald Trump’s 'complete nonsense' claims about crime in London
Read more: Police probe ‘missed opportunities’ over claims officer ‘ran grooming gang’
"Some of these laws were written in the 1980s for a whole different purpose. We are applying them to full effect today," Sir Mark said.
"That's not to say that's how I would like it to be. But those are the rules at the moment. It's really frustrating to be using law that is quite old. Parliament has created laws which are actually quite vague and difficult."
The “from the river to the sea” chant has been frequently heard and displayed at pro-Palestine demonstrations.
Written in full, it says: "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free."
The slogan is open to an array of interpretations, as it references the land between the Jordan River, which borders eastern Israel and the Mediterranean Sea to the west.
Some believe the phrase is a rejection of Israel and signifies a genocidal intent of the Jewish people.
But others argue it expresses a desire for a state in which Palestinians can live as free citizens.
This ambiguity is what stops police from arresting or charging demonstrators, Sir Mark said.
"We have repeatedly gone to the CPS to say, 'Can we prosecute in this circumstance?' and the answer is always no
"It would need to be threatening or abusive with racist or religious hatred overtones.
"It doesn't quite get there because lawyers will say is that whilst to some people its means the obliteration of Israel and Jews, to other people it has different meanings. So that ambiguity means you can convict beyond reasonable doubt in a court of law."
Sir Mark felt that demonstrations were a huge factor in "driving polarisation and anger in the UK'.
He added that pro-Palestine, pro-Israel and far-right protestors were choosing "offensive" chants and slogans which would not get them arrested.
'The growing heat on protests in the last couple of years is extraordinary. They are driving polarisation and anger," the police chief said.
"People are choosing slogans at all these protests that go close to the legal line, that are offensive and upsetting to other communities. I see that driving polarisation in London."
Home secretary Shabana Mahmood announced an independent review of existing public order and hate crime legislation following the Manchester synagogue terrorist attack on October 2.
The inquiry, led Lord Macdonald of River Glaven KC, was launched this week and will review the laws on public order and hate crime.
Ms Mahmood said: "Our laws must protect the public, while upholding the right to protest and free speech. That is why we have asked Lord Macdonald to lead this review. His experience will ensure it is thorough and independent.
"Lawful protest and free speech are fundamental rights, but we cannot allow them to be abused to spread hate or cause disorder. The law must be fit for purpose and consistently applied."