(London) Wait, am I mistaken or is it here in the British capital that we find the famous Speaker’s Corner, in a corner of Hyde Park? Lenin, Karl Marx and George Orwell all spoke there when they were the provocateurs of their time.
Posted at 7:00 a.m.
As tradition dictates, no one stopped them in their oratory momentum, even though they were calling for an overhaul of the political and economic system.
But these days, while royal traditions are strictly adhered to in the immense choreography of the mourning of Queen Elizabeth II and the arrival of her son on the throne, English customs regarding freedom of expression, they take on water.
In recent days, the police have arrested protesters on the sidelines of major royal ceremonies. In Edinburgh, Oxford and London.
Their crime? Attempting to demonstrate against the monarchy or Charles’ accession to the throne. Not in a big group. Alone.
In Scotland, a 22-year-old Mariangela held up a sign calling for the abolition of the monarchy just before the king’s proclamation was read in Edinburgh. “Fuck imperialism,” it also read.
In less time than it takes to shout “kilt”, a group of police surrounded the young green-haired woman, arrested her and accused her of “disturbancing the order”. It’s called having sensitive skin.
The scenario was the same in Oxford where Symon Hill, 45, who describes himself as a “Christian author and activist” on his Twitter account, was arrested by police for shouting “Who elected him? at another King’s Proclamation Ceremony, in the heart of University City. He was released, but remained dumbfounded by the short lock of the police.
In London on Sunday, a woman who held up a poster reading “Not my king” outside the Palace of Westminster was escorted by police to a less visible location.
Also in London, lawyer and human rights activist Paul Powlesland, holding a blank piece of paper, had a conversation in public with a police officer. The latter told him that he would have to stop him if he wrote an anti-royal slogan on said paper because “someone might be offended”.
The lawyer quickly reported this conversation on the internet. And his indignation. “A period of mourning for the Queen is OK, but using this period to cement Charles’s accession to the post of King and quell dissent to that accession is disrespectful and intolerable,” he wrote. .
We don’t tell him.
Of course, the disappearance of Queen Elizabeth II after 70 years of reign is a historic moment and the police have their hands full. Over the next few days, millions of people are expected in London for a farewell to the sovereign which will culminate in Monday’s funeral.
The police must have their eyes everywhere to subdue potential threats and to ensure that the various events surrounding the bereavement go smoothly. The authorities have been preparing for years for this solemn event, marking the end of an era. All this is laudable but does not justify the exaggerated reactions to each small discordant note.
Especially since for the moment, it is not the memory of Queen Elizabeth II that is targeted by the few demonstrators, but the institution that is the British monarchy as well as the process of succession.
On Sunday, I devoted a column to the British Republicans. If polls are to be believed, around one-fifth of UK citizens want to replace the king with an elected head of state. Like in Ireland.
Republicans – not to be confused with their American namesakes – are not talking about a revolution or about sending monarchs to jail for revenge, but simply about a constitutional change that could be made following a referendum. Democratically.
Several Republicans I have spoken to since my arrival in London have told me that they are afraid to express their ideas openly in a public space saturated by the monarchy, fearing outright reprisals – losing their jobs, contracts, friends.
The actions of the police in recent days will not calm their fears, and it is quite uncomfortable to think that in a democracy that claims to be robust, a whole ideological current is struggling to be heard.
Several human rights organisations, including London-based Amnesty International, have for some time worried about the erosion of the UK’s bill of rights and the relentless shrinking of the right to protest.
The few episodes reported in recent days are just as many flashing red lights that should worry not only democracy enthusiasts, but also the royal family itself.
Since the death of his mother, Charles III, the eternally unloved, has experienced a resurgence in popularity. The latest polls indicate that 62% of Britons think he will make a good king, up 24 points from last March. But this opinion can fluctuate quickly.
The British, if they have the impression that they are being forced to cheer for the new sovereign, that their arm is being twisted, could rebel. And many go to Speaker’s Corner to shout “Not my king”. It is their right.