从《权利法案》到《公共秩序法》,英国公众集会权之争

Q2 Arts and Humanities
K. Navickas
{"title":"从《权利法案》到《公共秩序法》,英国公众集会权之争","authors":"K. Navickas","doi":"10.1017/S0080440122000032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The ‘right of public meeting’ has historically been a key demand of extra-parliamentary political movements in England. This paper examines how public assembly came to be perceived as a legally protected right, and how national and local authorities debated and policed political meetings. Whereas previous histories have suggested that a ‘liberal governance’ dominated urban government during the nineteenth century, this paper offers an alternative framework for understanding the relationship between people and the state. It points to rights paradoxes, whereby the right of free passage and to ‘air and recreation’ often conflicted with the demand for the right of political meeting in challenges to use of public spaces. Local authorities sought to defend the rights of property against political movements by using the common law offences of obstruction and ‘nuisance’. By the first half of the twentieth century, new threats of militant tactics and racial harassment by political groups necessitated specific public order legislation. Though twentieth-century legislation sought to protect certain types of assembly and protest marches, the implementation and policing of public order was spatially discriminatory, and the right of public meeting was left unresolved.","PeriodicalId":23231,"journal":{"name":"Transactions of the Royal Historical Society","volume":"32 1","pages":"199 - 221"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Contested Right of Public Meeting in England from the Bill of Rights to the Public Order Acts\",\"authors\":\"K. Navickas\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0080440122000032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The ‘right of public meeting’ has historically been a key demand of extra-parliamentary political movements in England. This paper examines how public assembly came to be perceived as a legally protected right, and how national and local authorities debated and policed political meetings. Whereas previous histories have suggested that a ‘liberal governance’ dominated urban government during the nineteenth century, this paper offers an alternative framework for understanding the relationship between people and the state. It points to rights paradoxes, whereby the right of free passage and to ‘air and recreation’ often conflicted with the demand for the right of political meeting in challenges to use of public spaces. Local authorities sought to defend the rights of property against political movements by using the common law offences of obstruction and ‘nuisance’. By the first half of the twentieth century, new threats of militant tactics and racial harassment by political groups necessitated specific public order legislation. Though twentieth-century legislation sought to protect certain types of assembly and protest marches, the implementation and policing of public order was spatially discriminatory, and the right of public meeting was left unresolved.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23231,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transactions of the Royal Historical Society\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"199 - 221\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transactions of the Royal Historical Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080440122000032\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transactions of the Royal Historical Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0080440122000032","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要“公众集会权”历来是英国议会外政治运动的一项关键要求。本文探讨了公众集会如何被视为一项受法律保护的权利,以及国家和地方当局如何辩论和监督政治会议。尽管之前的历史表明,19世纪的城市政府由“自由主义治理”主导,但本文为理解人民与国家之间的关系提供了一个替代框架。它指出了权利的悖论,即自由通行权和“空气和娱乐”权往往与在使用公共空间的挑战中对政治集会权的要求相冲突。地方当局试图通过使用普通法中的妨碍和“妨害”罪来捍卫财产权,以对抗政治运动。到了二十世纪上半叶,政治团体的激进战术和种族骚扰的新威胁需要制定具体的公共秩序立法。尽管20世纪的立法试图保护某些类型的集会和抗议游行,但公共秩序的实施和治安在空间上是歧视性的,公众集会的权利没有得到解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Contested Right of Public Meeting in England from the Bill of Rights to the Public Order Acts
Abstract The ‘right of public meeting’ has historically been a key demand of extra-parliamentary political movements in England. This paper examines how public assembly came to be perceived as a legally protected right, and how national and local authorities debated and policed political meetings. Whereas previous histories have suggested that a ‘liberal governance’ dominated urban government during the nineteenth century, this paper offers an alternative framework for understanding the relationship between people and the state. It points to rights paradoxes, whereby the right of free passage and to ‘air and recreation’ often conflicted with the demand for the right of political meeting in challenges to use of public spaces. Local authorities sought to defend the rights of property against political movements by using the common law offences of obstruction and ‘nuisance’. By the first half of the twentieth century, new threats of militant tactics and racial harassment by political groups necessitated specific public order legislation. Though twentieth-century legislation sought to protect certain types of assembly and protest marches, the implementation and policing of public order was spatially discriminatory, and the right of public meeting was left unresolved.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: The Royal Historical Society has published the highest quality scholarship in history for over 150 years. A subscription includes a substantial annual volume of the Society’s Transactions, which presents wide-ranging reports from the front lines of historical research by both senior and younger scholars, and two volumes from the Camden Fifth Series, which makes available to a wider audience valuable primary sources that have hitherto been available only in manuscript form.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信