Court of Appeal ruling on Colston 4 case ‘disappointing’

A Court of Appeal judgement triggered by the Colston 4’s acquittal weakens protest rights, warn lawyers.

The ruling issued on Wednesday stated that human rights defences in criminal damage trials would only be allowed in certain cases, depending on the perceived level of violence and only when the damage is considered ‘low value’.

Former attorney general Suella Braverman, who is now the home secretary, referred the case to the Court of Appeal after the four who stood trial for toppling Edward Colston’s statue in Bristol were acquitted in January.

While the judgement can’t overturn the not guilty verdicts of Jake Skuse, Rhian Graham, Milo Ponsford and Sage Willoughby – for whom multiple defences were put forward in court – it does mean a human rights defence would not be allowed in such cases in the future.

The Court of Appeal ruled that due to the ‘high value’ of Colston’s statue and the manner in which it was brought down, which it described as ‘violent’, defendants in cases around similar incidents in the future would not be able to use human rights defences as the Colston Four did.

Lawyers for the four have described the ruling as “disappointing”, while human rights organisation Liberty says it takes away vital protections that empower everyone to be able to stand up for what they believe in.

Raj Chada, partner at Hodge Jones & Allen, who represented Skuse, said “We are disappointed by the Court of Appeal judgement. In our view, the evidence at the trial was that the toppling was not done violently.

“The clear view from an expert valuer, which we were prevented from relying upon during the trial, was that the value of the statue had increased exponentially after the toppling. The statue is still on public display as a monument to the evils of the slave trade, not as an obscene glorification of a slave trader.”

Graham said the wider implications of the ruling remain to be seen but she refuses to be disheartened.

“Having been on the ground the day Edward Colston’s statue was toppled, I am still confident in saying it was not a violent act. It was the cathartic removal of a memorial to an oppressor of people and an abuser of power who had too long loomed over the people of Bristol. The fact that it is gone is still right for Bristol,” said Graham.

“The positive impact of the toppling for both Bristol and the anti-racism movement as a whole can never be undone and this judgement cannot overturn the decision made by a jury of our peers.

“What I would like to know is why our government continues to spend time and tax payers’ money on defending a memorial of a slave trader via this appeal case and the introduction of a maximum sentence of ten years for damaging a statue (via the Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Bill) when there are so many more pressing issues at hand.”

Responding to the judgement, Liberty said that everyone should be able to invoke their human rights in a legal defence.

The organisation is also calling for the government to drop its proposals in the Public Order Bill – which include criminalising the protest practice of ‘locking on’ and giving additional stop & search powers against protesters – arguing it will be a further ‘hammer blow’ to the right to protest.

Liberty lawyer Katy Watts said: “Protest is a fundamental right, not a gift from the state. Today’s judgement puts a threshold on when people can enact their human rights in a legal case and takes away vital protections that empower everyone to be able to stand up for what they believe in.

“We are disappointed that the court has said that human rights are not always linked to acts of protest. By placing weight on the value of an object in deciding if human rights can be taken into account, we feel that the court is shifting the balance too far away from our essential human rights.”

Main photo: Ellie Pipe

Read next:

• Colston 4 acquittal verdict to be sent to Court of Appeal 
• Colston 4 barrister: ‘The prosecution was not in the public interest’
• Not guilty verdicts in the trial of the Colston 4
• Rees: ‘Colston’s statue not being there is a good thing but we must deal with issues of substance’ 

Listen to the latest Bristol24/7 Behind the Headlines podcast: