Article 11: assembly and association | AQA A-Level Law
For Specification 7162
AQA A-Level Law | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 60 minutes
Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) protects the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association with others. These Article 11: assembly and association A-Level Law revision notes explain how the right protects people who come together, particularly during peaceful marches, demonstrations and protests, as well as their freedom to associate with others. Article 11 is closely connected with freedom of expression [Lesson 176. Article 10: freedom of expression], because people often assemble in order to communicate shared ideas or opinions.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain the right protected by Article 11.1.
Explain the meaning and importance of freedom of peaceful assembly.
Explain freedom of association with others.
Explain the State's role in protecting peaceful assemblies from interference by others.
Identify when Article 11.1 is engaged in protests, marches and demonstrations.
Apply Article 11.1 accurately to factual scenarios.
Revision Notes 📚
What does Article 11.1 protect?
The AQA specification requires students to know Article 11.1, which protects:
the right to freedom of peaceful assembly
the right to freedom of association with others.
These rights allow individuals to come together and act collectively.
Article 11 is particularly important in factual scenarios involving:
demonstrations
marches
static protests
organised groups
collective political activity.
AQA examination materials frequently apply Article 11 to protest scenarios in which several people gather together to advance a shared cause.
The two parts of Article 11.1
Article 11.1 contains two connected protections.
Article 11.1 protection | Core idea |
Freedom of peaceful assembly | People may come together peacefully for a shared purpose, including marches and demonstrations. |
Freedom of association with others | People may organise and act together with others in pursuit of shared interests or aims. |
The two rights can overlap.
A group of campaigners who organise themselves and then hold a demonstration may be exercising both freedom of association and freedom of assembly.
Freedom of peaceful assembly
An assembly involves people coming together.
AQA assessment materials repeatedly apply Article 11 to:
marches
demonstrations
static protests
public gatherings connected with campaigning.
For example, the 2024 examiner report states that Article 11 was engaged because protestors were exercising their freedom of assembly and association by marching and demonstrating.
The right is therefore not confined to one particular type of gathering.
Marches and demonstrations
Article 11 can protect both moving and static forms of protest.
A march involves participants moving together, while a demonstration may involve people gathering at a particular place.
The detailed English law distinction between a procession and an assembly is studied later in Assembly and association [Lesson 189. Assembly and association].
For Article 11.1 itself, the important point is that both forms of collective peaceful protest are capable of engaging the Convention right.
Example
Thirty campaigners walk together through a town carrying signs objecting to the closure of a hospital.
They are gathering together for a shared purpose.
Their march therefore engages Article 11.1.
Because the signs communicate their views, Article 10 may also be engaged.
The assembly must be peaceful
The wording of Article 11.1 specifically protects peaceful assembly.
This word matters.
A peaceful demonstration can fall within Article 11 even where:
its message is unpopular
other people disagree with it
the demonstration causes annoyance
opponents react angrily to it.
AQA examiner reports repeatedly distinguish between the conduct of peaceful demonstrators and violence or threats coming from people opposed to them.
What does "peaceful" mean in an exam scenario?
The safest approach is to examine the conduct of the people claiming the Article 11 right.
Ask:
Are they using violence?
Are they threatening violence?
Is the gathering itself peaceful?
Is the danger actually being created by someone else?
Do not automatically describe a protest as non-peaceful merely because there is tension around it.
Example
A group of residents stands peacefully outside a proposed development carrying placards.
Opponents arrive and begin shouting threats at them.
The original residents have not necessarily lost Article 11 protection simply because other people are threatening violence.
This distinction was central to AQA's 2022 assessment.
Ava, Brett and Cian: peaceful protest and hostile opponents
AQA's 2022 examination provides a particularly useful model.
Ava, Brett and Cian staged a peaceful demonstration against plans for a fast-food shop. Residents reacted angrily and created a threat of violence and disorder. Police stopped the demonstration.
The mark scheme expected students to recognise that:
Ava, Brett and Cian were exercising Article 11 rights
their own conduct was peaceful
the threat was coming from people opposed to them
police action against the peaceful demonstrators could therefore interfere with Article 11.
This gives an important principle:
The hostile reaction of others does not automatically make a peaceful assembly non-peaceful.
Article 11 and counter-protests
A protest may attract opponents or counter-protesters.
Article 11 does not allow a hostile group simply to silence a peaceful gathering by threatening violence.
AQA's 2022 mark scheme states that Article 11 should not be applied so as to permit counter-protesters to threaten disorder or crime and thereby stifle a peaceful protest.
This means the State may have obligations going beyond simply not interfering with an assembly itself.
Positive obligation to facilitate peaceful protest
Article 11 may impose a positive obligation on the State.
This means that authorities may sometimes need to take reasonable steps to make the exercise of peaceful assembly possible.
AQA examiner reports use Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria to illustrate this principle.
The 2024 report explains that police may have a positive duty to facilitate a peaceful protest, which may require policing both a demonstration and a counter-protest.
In other words, the police should not always respond to threatened disorder by stopping whichever group is easiest to remove.
Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria
This case is useful where peaceful demonstrators face hostility from opponents.
The principle supported in AQA materials is that Article 11 can require the State to take reasonable measures to enable peaceful assembly to take place.
Example
A small environmental group holds a peaceful demonstration.
A much larger hostile group arrives and threatens to attack them.
Police have enough officers available to separate the two groups but instead immediately order the peaceful campaigners to leave.
Article 11 may be engaged not only because the police have stopped the assembly, but also because they may have failed properly to facilitate the peaceful protest.
The State does not guarantee that every protest will be trouble-free
The positive obligation does not mean that police must guarantee that nobody will ever:
object to a demonstration
shout at protesters
organise a counter-protest.
Article 11 protects meaningful freedom of peaceful assembly, but it does not require authorities to eliminate all disagreement.
The important issue is whether authorities have taken appropriate steps to protect peaceful exercise of the right, particularly where there is a genuine threat from others.
Freedom of association with others
Article 11.1 separately protects freedom of association with others. This is expressly required by the AQA specification.
Association concerns individuals acting together rather than purely as isolated persons.
At the level required for this lesson, students should understand that Article 11 protects the freedom of individuals to organise themselves and participate collectively with others.
AQA's examination materials regularly describe campaigners acting as members of groups as exercising their rights to assembly and association.
Example
Several residents form a campaign group opposing the closure of a local library. They organise meetings and act collectively to promote their shared view.
Their collective organisation can engage freedom of association with others.
If they later hold a public demonstration, freedom of peaceful assembly is also engaged.
Association and assembly are not exactly the same
The two concepts are closely related, but it is useful to distinguish them.
Association concerns people joining together or organising collectively.
Assembly concerns people physically gathering together.
For example:
belonging to and acting through a campaign organisation involves association
attending its peaceful demonstration involves assembly.
A factual scenario may involve both rights at the same time.
Article 11 and Article 10
Article 11 frequently operates alongside Article 10: freedom of expression [Lesson 176. Article 10: freedom of expression].
The connection is straightforward:
People often assemble because they want to express a shared opinion.
AQA's 2025 examiner report explains that Articles 10 and 11 are closely connected because the aim of a protest is commonly to express a view or opinion.
Recognising both Articles in protest scenarios
Consider campaigners who:
march through a town
carry banners
give speeches
gather outside a public building.
Article 11 protects their collective assembly and association.
Article 10 protects their expression through the banners and speeches.
A strong answer spots both rights where the facts support them.
The 2024 examiner report noted that most students recognised Article 11 in a protest scenario, but not all recognised Article 10 as well.
Peaceful protest can be annoying or offensive
The fact that other people find a demonstration irritating or offensive does not automatically remove Article 11 protection.
AQA's 2024 examiner report states that Article 11 protects peaceful protest even where the demonstration annoys or offends people opposed to it.
The 2025 report similarly explains that protest and expression may shock or disturb others while still falling within Articles 11 and 10.
Example
A peaceful animal-rights group stands outside a business carrying signs strongly criticising its practices.
Employees dislike the protest and find it offensive.
That reaction does not, by itself, mean that Article 11.1 is no longer engaged.
Ollinger v Austria
AQA examiner reports refer to Ollinger v Austria when discussing the protection of protest that may provoke or disturb others.
The case can support the broader examination point that peaceful protest does not lose protection merely because others object strongly to it.
You do not need to turn every Article 11 answer into a long case summary.
A short use of authority is normally more effective:
The fact that the demonstration annoys opponents does not itself remove Article 11 protection, as illustrated by Ollinger v Austria.
Then apply the facts.
Public land and peaceful protest
AQA's recent examiner reports distinguish protest in public places from gatherings on private property.
Article 11 provides significant protection for peaceful protest in appropriate public spaces.
However, it does not generally create an unlimited right to protest wherever the protestor chooses.
This distinction becomes important where campaigners move onto privately controlled land.
Appleby v UK and private property
AQA's 2023 and 2025 examiner reports use Appleby v UK in scenarios involving protests on private property.
The reports explain that an owner of private land may generally prohibit an assembly where there is a suitable alternative place for the protest.
In the 2025 examination, students were credited for recognising that Article 11 protects protest on public land, but that the same protection does not generally apply to trespass on private property.
Example
Campaigners peacefully demonstrate on the public pavement outside a privately owned attraction.
Article 11.1 is clearly capable of applying.
If they later climb over a fence and occupy the privately owned attraction without permission, the Article 11 analysis may be very different.
Trespass and Article 11
Do not write the over-simple rule:
"Trespassing automatically breaches Article 11."
That is legally confused.
The 2023 examiner report identified students who incorrectly claimed that protestors themselves had breached Article 11 because they were trespassing or were no longer peaceful.
Article 11 gives individuals rights against the State.
A protestor does not "breach their own Article 11 rights".
The correct issue is whether their conduct falls within the protection of Article 11, and whether any State interference is lawful.
Who can interfere with Article 11 rights?
The Human Rights Act framework is important.
Police officers are agents of the State and therefore public authorities for the purposes of the Convention system.
AQA's 2024 and 2025 reports praise students who recognised that police must act compatibly with ECHR rights.This connects Article 11 back to The Human Rights Act 1998 [Lesson 169. The Human Rights Act 1998].
Common forms of State interference
A public authority may interfere with Article 11 by:
stopping a demonstration
directing participants to leave
limiting the number of people permitted to gather
altering the route of a march
arresting participants
failing to provide reasonable protection from violent counter-protesters.
The first task is to identify the interference.
Do not assume automatically that every interference is unlawful.
Interference does not automatically equal violation
Article 11 is a qualified right.
This means that Article 11.2 permits restrictions in specified circumstances.
Those restrictions are the focus of the next lesson, Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 [Lesson 178. Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11].
For this lesson, keep the stages separate:
Is Article 11.1 engaged?
Is the assembly peaceful?
What aspect of assembly or association is being exercised?
Has a public authority interfered with that exercise?
A wider problem would then consider whether Article 11.2 justifies the interference.
A peaceful assembly can still be restricted
Do not make the opposite mistake and assume:
"If the protest is peaceful, the police can never interfere with it."
AQA examiner reports use Cisse v France to demonstrate that even a peaceful assembly may sometimes be lawfully restricted.
The detailed legal test for deciding whether such interference is justified belongs to Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 [Lesson 178. Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11] and General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
The important distinction for now is:
Peaceful conduct brings a gathering within the scope of Article 11.1, but it does not make the right absolute.
Cisse v France
AQA materials use Cisse v France to reinforce the qualified nature of Article 11.
The case is useful as a reminder that:
an assembly can be peaceful
Article 11.1 can therefore be engaged
yet State interference may still potentially be justified.
This avoids a common all-or-nothing approach to Convention rights.
Counter-protesters and the "heckler's veto"
Although AQA does not use the expression "heckler's veto" in the specification, its examiner materials repeatedly test the underlying principle.
Suppose:
Group A holds a lawful peaceful demonstration
Group B threatens violence because it dislikes Group A's message
police stop Group A simply because Group B is threatening disorder.
The issue is not merely that disorder exists.
AQA's Article 11 materials require students to ask whether the police should instead have taken reasonable steps to deal with the threatening counter-protesters and facilitate the peaceful assembly.
Worked example: peaceful protest and hostile residents
Scenario
Ellie, Finn and Grace hold a peaceful demonstration on a public pavement against plans for a new supermarket. They stand quietly holding signs. A group of residents who support the supermarket become angry and threaten to attack them. Police immediately order Ellie, Finn and Grace to end their demonstration.
Application
Article 11.1 is engaged because Ellie, Finn and Grace are participating in a peaceful assembly.
Their signs also mean Article 10 is likely to be engaged.
The fact that supporters of the supermarket are threatening violence does not automatically remove the demonstrators' Article 11 protection.
The principle illustrated by Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria suggests that police may have a positive obligation to take reasonable steps to facilitate a peaceful protest rather than allowing hostile opponents to silence it.
The police order therefore amounts to an interference with Article 11. Whether that interference can ultimately be justified requires the separate Article 11.2 analysis.
Worked example: public protest becomes trespass
Scenario
A campaign group stages a peaceful protest on the public pavement outside a privately owned wildlife park. Later, three members climb over a fence without permission and continue protesting inside the park.
Application
The original roadside protest is clearly capable of engaging Article 11.1 because the participants are peacefully assembling in a public place.
The position of the three people inside the private property is different.
AQA examiner reports use Appleby v UK to support the principle that Article 11 does not generally provide an unrestricted entitlement to protest on private land where suitable alternatives exist.
The three protestors should not be described as "breaching Article 11". Instead, the issue is whether their particular gathering remains protected by Article 11 and whether State action taken against them interferes with a Convention right.
Worked example: freedom of association
Scenario
Residents create a campaign group to oppose the sale of a public park. Members hold regular meetings and organise collective campaigning. A public authority tells them they may not organise together solely because it dislikes their campaign.
Application
Article 11.1 expressly protects freedom of association with others.
The residents are acting collectively in pursuit of a shared purpose.
The public authority's action therefore potentially interferes with Article 11.1.
If the group later stages a peaceful demonstration, freedom of assembly may also be engaged.
A complete problem would then consider whether any restriction could be justified under Article 11.2.
Applying Article 11 to factual scenarios
AQA Article 11 problems reward systematic application.
Use the following approach.
Step 1: identify the people acting together
Ask:
Who is gathering?
Are they acting as a group?
What is their shared purpose?
This establishes whether assembly or association may be relevant.
Step 2: identify the Article 11 activity
Is the scenario about:
a march
a demonstration
a static gathering
an organised campaign group
another form of collective activity?
State specifically how Article 11 is engaged.
Step 3: ask whether the assembly is peaceful
Look at the conduct of the protestors themselves.
Do not automatically attribute the conduct of hostile members of the public to the demonstrators.
Step 4: identify Article 10 as well where appropriate
If participants are:
carrying banners
giving speeches
chanting
distributing leaflets
they may also be exercising freedom of expression [Lesson 176. Article 10: freedom of expression].
AQA examiner reports regularly reward recognition of the overlap between Articles 10 and 11.
Step 5: consider where the assembly takes place
Ask whether participants are:
using public space
occupying private property without permission.
Where private land is involved, Appleby v UK may become relevant.
Step 6: identify the State interference
Do not write vaguely that:
"The police breached their rights."
Identify exactly what happened:
the march was stopped
numbers were restricted
participants were told to leave
an individual was arrested
the police failed to protect peaceful demonstrators from violent opponents.
Step 7: consider any positive obligation
If violence is threatened by others, ask whether the police should reasonably have taken steps to facilitate the peaceful protest.
Use Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria where appropriate.
Step 8: reach a limited Article 11.1 conclusion
For this lesson, a strong conclusion might be:
The roadside demonstration was peaceful and therefore within Article 11.1. The police order ending it constitutes an interference with the protestors' freedom of peaceful assembly. The threat of violence came from opponents, so the police's positive duty to facilitate peaceful protest is also relevant.
Then acknowledge:
Whether the interference can ultimately be justified requires consideration of Article 11.2.
That keeps the answer within the correct legal structure.
Article 11 and later learning
This lesson establishes the scope of the right.
The next stage is to determine when the State may lawfully restrict it.
You will therefore build directly on this lesson in:
Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 [Lesson 178. Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11]
General requirements governing restrictions [Lesson 179. General requirements governing restrictions].
Later, Assembly and association [Lesson 189. Assembly and association] connects Article 11 with the relevant English law governing assemblies, marches and police powers.
Key Words 🔑
Key word | Student-friendly definition | How it may be used in an exam |
Peaceful assembly | People coming together without violence to pursue a shared purpose, including peaceful demonstrations and marches. | Identify whether a protest or gathering comes within Article 11.1. |
Association | People organising and acting collectively with others for shared purposes or interests. | Apply where individuals form or participate in an organised group. |
Positive obligation | A duty requiring the State in appropriate circumstances to take reasonable steps to enable a Convention right to be exercised. | Use where police fail to protect peaceful demonstrators from hostile counter-protesters. |
Counter-protest | A gathering organised in opposition to another protest or demonstration. | Consider whether police should facilitate both peaceful groups rather than allowing threats to silence one side. |
Interference | Action by a public authority which restricts the exercise of freedom of assembly or association. | Identify the precise police or State action before considering Article 11.2. |
Hints from the Examiner Reports 💡
Examiner hint: Start by deciding whether the protest itself is peaceful. In 2025, most students correctly used the fact that roadside protestors were not obstructing traffic to support the conclusion that their assembly was peaceful.
Examiner hint: Do not assume that hostile reactions from other people remove Article 11 protection. The 2022 and 2024 materials stress that the State may have a positive duty to facilitate peaceful protest and protect demonstrators from threatening counter-protesters.
Examiner hint: Look for Article 10 as well as Article 11. The 2024 report noted that most students recognised assembly and association but not all identified the accompanying freedom of expression. Strong responses recognise that protests commonly exercise both rights.
Examiner hint: Identify every separate interference. In 2025, stronger responses separately considered the restriction on protest numbers, instructions to protestors to leave and the subsequent arrest rather than treating all police conduct as one general interference.
Examiner hint: Do not say that protestors themselves have "breached Article 11". The 2023 report specifically identified this error. The Convention obligation is imposed on the State and public authorities. The question is whether the individual's conduct is protected and whether the State has lawfully interfered with it.
Examiner hint: Pay careful attention to location. AQA's 2023 and 2025 reports use Appleby v UK to distinguish ordinary peaceful protest from attempts to protest on private property without permission.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Assuming any gathering automatically receives Article 11 protection
Why this is incorrect: Article 11.1 expressly protects peaceful assembly.
How to improve: Analyse the demonstrators' conduct and state why the assembly is peaceful before applying Article 11.
Mistake: Treating violence by opponents as violence by the protestors
Why this is incorrect: A peaceful demonstration does not automatically lose Article 11 protection because hostile people threaten the demonstrators.
How to improve: Identify which group is responsible for the threat. Consider the State's positive duty to facilitate peaceful protest.
Mistake: Forgetting freedom of association
Why this is incorrect: Article 11.1 protects both peaceful assembly and association with others.
How to improve: Ask whether the people are also organising or acting collectively as members of a group.
Mistake: Missing Article 10 in a protest scenario
Why this is incorrect: Demonstrations often exist to communicate ideas. Banners, speeches, chants and leaflets can engage Article 10 as well as Article 11.
How to improve: Check separately for assembly and expression.
Mistake: Saying a peaceful protest can never be restricted
Why this is incorrect: Article 11 is a qualified right. A peaceful assembly falls within Article 11.1, but interference can potentially be justified under Article 11.2.
How to improve: Separate the scope of the right from the later justification question.
Mistake: Saying protestors "breach Article 11"
Why this is incorrect: Individuals exercise Article 11 rights. The Convention duties examined under the Human Rights Act are imposed on public authorities.
How to improve: Say that particular conduct may fall outside Article 11 protection, rather than claiming that the protestor has breached their own right.
Mistake: Assuming Article 11 gives an unlimited right to protest on private land
Why this is incorrect: AQA materials use Appleby v UK to show that Article 11 does not generally provide an unrestricted right to assemble on another person's private property where alternatives exist.
How to improve: Identify whether the demonstration is on public or private land before reaching a conclusion.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Which one of the following statements about Article 11.1 is correct?
A. It protects every gathering, whether peaceful or violent.
B. It protects peaceful assembly and freedom of association with others.
C. It protects only formally organised political demonstrations.
D. It guarantees an unrestricted right to demonstrate on private property.
[1 mark]
Question 2
State the two freedoms protected by Article 11.1.
[2 marks]
Question 3
Explain why Articles 10 and 11 may both be engaged by a peaceful political demonstration.
[5 marks]
Question 4
Six residents peacefully stand outside a council office holding signs opposing the closure of a local library. They do not block the entrance or threaten anyone.
Explain how Article 11.1 applies.
[5 marks]
Question 5
A peaceful group demonstrating against a new housing development is confronted by an angry counter-protest. The counter-protesters threaten to attack them. Police have sufficient officers available to separate the groups but instead immediately order the original peaceful demonstrators to leave.
Explain why Article 11 may be engaged.
[5 marks]
Question 6
Members of a local environmental group organise themselves to campaign against pollution. They meet regularly and later stage a peaceful public demonstration.
Explain how both parts of Article 11.1 may apply to their activities.
[5 marks]
Question 7
A group peacefully demonstrates on the public pavement outside a privately owned shopping centre. Members carry banners criticising a company operating inside. The centre's customers become angry and threaten the demonstrators. Police immediately stop the demonstration without attempting to control those making threats.
Advise the demonstrators on the application of Article 11.1.
[10 marks]
Question 8
Twenty campaigners hold a peaceful protest in a public square. Some members of the public complain that the protestors' views are offensive. Police order the protest to end solely because of the complaints.
Analyse the Article 11 issues raised by the facts.
[10 marks]
Question 9
A campaign group holds a peaceful demonstration on the pavement outside a privately owned wildlife park. Later, three members climb over the park's fence without permission and continue their protest inside. Police order the three to leave.
Explain how Article 11 applies differently to the two stages of the protest.
[10 marks]
Answers and Indicative Mark Scheme
Question 1
Answer: B.
Article 11.1 protects freedom of peaceful assembly and freedom of association with others.
[1 mark]
Question 2
Award one mark for each:
freedom of peaceful assembly
freedom of association with others.
Maximum: 2 marks.
Question 3
Indicative content:
Article 11.1 protects freedom of peaceful assembly.
People attending a peaceful demonstration are assembling together.
Article 10.1 protects freedom of expression.
Political demonstrations commonly involve communication of views through banners, speeches, chants or other expressive conduct.
The same protest may therefore engage Articles 10 and 11 simultaneously.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 4
Indicative content:
Article 11.1 protects peaceful assembly.
The six residents have gathered together for the shared purpose of protesting against library closure.
Their conduct is expressly stated to be peaceful.
They are not blocking access or threatening others.
Article 11.1 is therefore clearly engaged.
Their signs may additionally engage Article 10.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 5
Indicative content:
The original group is exercising freedom of peaceful assembly under Article 11.1.
The threat of violence comes from the counter-protesters rather than the original demonstrators.
Hostile reaction does not automatically remove Article 11 protection.
The State may have a positive obligation to facilitate peaceful protest.
Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria may support this principle.
Since sufficient officers are available to separate the groups, immediately stopping the peaceful demonstration raises a possible Article 11 interference.
Whether that interference is ultimately justified would require Article 11.2.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 6
Indicative content:
Article 11.1 contains both freedom of association and freedom of peaceful assembly.
The individuals organise and act together through their environmental campaign group, engaging association.
Their later public demonstration involves people physically gathering together.
Because the demonstration is peaceful, it engages freedom of peaceful assembly.
If they communicate their views through banners or speeches, Article 10 may also be relevant.
Maximum: 5 marks.
Question 7
Indicative content:
AO1
Article 11.1 protects freedom of peaceful assembly.
The State may have a positive obligation to facilitate peaceful protest.
Plattform 'Ärzte für das Leben' v Austria supports protection from hostile counter-protests.
Peaceful protest does not cease to fall within Article 11 merely because opponents are angered or offended.
AO2
The demonstrators are on a public pavement.
Their conduct is peaceful.
The threats come from customers rather than from the demonstrators.
The police immediately stop the peaceful assembly.
They make no attempt to deal with those threatening violence.
AO3
Article 11.1 is clearly engaged.
Ending the demonstration constitutes an interference with the protestors' freedom of peaceful assembly.
There is also an argument that police failed to fulfil their positive obligation to facilitate the peaceful protest.
The banners additionally engage Article 10.
Whether the interference is ultimately lawful requires Article 11.2 analysis.
Maximum: 10 marks.
Question 8
Indicative content:
AO1
Article 11.1 protects peaceful assembly.
A protest may remain within Article 11 even if others dislike, oppose or are offended by its message.
Ollinger v Austria may be used in support.
Article 10 may also protect the expression of the protestors' views.
AO2
The twenty campaigners are gathered in a public square.
Their conduct is expressly peaceful.
There is no indication that they have threatened violence.
The only reason given for police intervention is that other people dislike the protestors' views.
AO3
Article 11.1 is therefore clearly engaged.
The police order ending the protest is an interference.
Offence taken by members of the public does not by itself remove Article 11 protection.
A complete answer to whether Article 11 has actually been violated would require consideration of Article 11.2.
Maximum: 10 marks.
Question 9
Indicative content:
AO1
Article 11 protects freedom of peaceful assembly.
Location can affect whether Article 11 protection applies.
AQA materials use Appleby v UK to distinguish protest on public land from attempts to assemble on private property without permission.
AO2
First stage:
The group is peacefully protesting on the public pavement.
Article 11.1 is clearly capable of applying.
The demonstration may also engage Article 10.
Second stage:
Three members enter privately owned land without permission.
Their physical location and trespass materially change the Article 11 analysis.
Article 11 does not provide an unrestricted right to use private property for protest where suitable alternatives exist.
AO3
The first demonstration has strong Article 11.1 protection.
The three protestors inside the wildlife park have a much weaker argument that Article 11 protects their chosen location.
They should not be described as having "breached Article 11". Instead, the issue is whether their activity remains within its protection.
Whether the police instruction is ultimately lawful also depends on the restrictions and domestic law considered in Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11 [Lesson 178. Restrictions under Articles 8, 10 and 11] and Assembly and association [Lesson 189. Assembly and association].
Maximum: 10 marks.
Comments