Victory in long fight for justice

I have been campaigning for several years on this issue and written about it many times in the PMA and elsewhere. I have always maintained that such immediate closures under section 19 of the Criminal Justice and Police Act 2001 were not authorised and that the threats of legal consequences if people did not close their bars immediately was outside police powers.

Now, the Home Office has admitted that its official advice was wrong and they and the police have had to pay substantial damages for the closures that they ordered.

It shows persistent campaigning pays off in the end. I was very pleased to be able to discuss the issues with Michael at the outset and to provide him with contact details for lawyers who held the same views as I did.

They have now been vindicated in court, but no apology has yet been issued by any of those who got the law so wrong. Lawyers work for the police as well as the trade. That is the nature of our legal system and there is nothing untoward in that, except that it may have a bearing on their attitude to the way in which the police go about their enforcement activities against the pub trade.

This section 19 power was never enacted to enable instant closure of pubs, but was entirely geared to the threat of closing down unlicensed premises that were operating illegally. The section 19 warning notice was intended to tell those involved that a court order would appear if they continued with their activities.

This is why other people in the building were entitled to make representations before the magistrates issued the final closure order, which was legally enforceable.

Unfortunately, a subtle change in the wording, slipped into the amendment section of the Licensing Act 2003, meant that the original meaning was broadened to include running a bar without compliance with all the licence conditions, not just without a licence entirely. This changed the picture dramatically.

It was several years ago that readers of the PMA started to contact the paper with news of Friday night visits and attempts by the police to close them down on the spot for some alleged ‘breach’ of conditions that they could not possibly rectify on the spot. It is very difficult for a designated premises supervisor, faced with a group of policeman and a threat of arrest, to remain defiant.

It is a sad fact that these earlier examples will not have a chance of being compensated for their lost trade. But now the situation is much clearer and it is really the responsibility of the Home Office to clarify its position and advise all police forces not to use these bully-boy tactics in future.

It is always good to go out with a bang. I have spent many years campaigning on behalf of publicans and will continue to do so if I see that the authorities are over-stepping their powers.

I hope that the many readers of the PMA whom I have been able to assist, either in print or by direct contact, will remember the advice and help they have received. I certainly will not forget them and my enjoyable time putting these pages together.