Manchester Synagogue Attack Prompts Review into Public Order Offences & Hate Crime

Independent Review to Examine Public Order and Hate Crime Laws

The government has announced a wide-ranging review of public order and hate crime legislation, led by Lord Macdonald of River Glaven KC, the former Director of Public Prosecutions.

The review follows the terrorist attack in Manchester on 2 October and comes amid growing concern about community tensions, protest activity, and the boundaries between lawful expression and criminal behaviour.

There is a general acceptance that social media is playing an increasing role in stirring up ratial, religious and other forms of hatred and division.

Other forms of digital communications also allow for encrypted messaging to allow those intent on criminal activity to communicate “unchecked” – helping them become better organised and their activities harder to prevent.  

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the review will ensure that laws protecting free speech and peaceful protest are “fit for purpose” while giving the police clear powers to prevent disorder and protect communities from hate and intimidation.

The work will begin immediately and is expected to conclude by February 2026.

A Changing Legal Landscape: Balancing Free Speech and Public Order

Public order and hate crime laws are among the most complex and sensitive areas of criminal justice.

They seek to balance two vital principles: the right to free expression and peaceful protest, and the need to protect individuals and communities from violence, harassment, and incitement to hatred.

Recent years have seen heightened debate over where that balance should lie – particularly in relation to protests that cause disruption, online “hate” speech. and public demonstrations involving contentious political or religious issues.

The review will therefore consider whether current laws remain effective, proportionate, and consistently applied.

From a criminal defence perspective, this review is significant.

It raises important questions about how offences are defined, interpreted, and enforced – especially where police powers overlap with freedom of expression and assembly under the Human Rights Act 1998.

What the Review Will Cover

According to the Home Office, the independent review will examine:

• The powers of police to manage protests and impose conditions under the Public Order Act 1986 and subsequent legislation;
• The effectiveness of current hate crime offences, including “stirring up hatred” provisions under the Public Order Act and offences aggravated by hostility to race, religion, sexual orientation, disability or transgender identity;
• Whether the law strikes the right balance between free speech protections and the need to prevent intimidation and disorder;
• How offences are being applied in practice – including any inconsistencies between regions or police forces.

Lord Macdonald will be supported by Owen Weatherill, a senior policing expert and National Police Chiefs’ Council lead for Civil Contingencies, ensuring that both legal and operational perspectives inform the review.

Potential Implications for Defendants and Protesters

While the government has stated that it “will always protect the right to lawful protest,” the review comes at a time of increasing enforcement against demonstrators and activists under laws such as the Public Order Act 2023 and the Crime and Policing Act 2022.

These Acts expanded police powers to impose conditions, restrict locations, and pre-empt protests considered “disruptive.”

In practice, this has led to a rise in arrests and prosecutions for offences such as:

• Failing to comply with protest conditions (Sections 12–14 Public Order Act 1986);
• Public nuisance and obstruction of the highway under common law and statute;
• Threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour under Section 4A or 5 of the Public Order Act;
• Inciting or stirring up hatred online or in person, under Part III of the Public Order Act 1986.

From a defence perspective, the challenge often lies in distinguishing between conduct that is deliberately harmful or intimidating and that which merely offends or provokes strong disagreement.

The threshold between lawful expression and criminal liability remains a central issue – one that the forthcoming review will undoubtedly scrutinise.

Hate Crime: Proportionality and Enforcement Concerns

The review will also look closely at existing hate crime laws and whether they remain effective and proportionate.

Current legislation allows for enhanced sentencing where an offence is “aggravated by hostility” towards protected characteristics such as race, religion, sexuality, disability, or gender identity.

Prosecutors can also pursue standalone offences of stirring up hatred, even where no physical violence occurs.

However, defence lawyers have long argued that such laws must be applied carefully to avoid chilling legitimate debate or expression.

The review presents an opportunity to assess whether these laws are being used appropriately and whether thresholds for prosecution are being consistently met.

It will also consider how police discretion is exercised – for example, when deciding whether a public statement, protest chant, or social media post crosses the line from expression into incitement.

Given the growing number of online communications cases, the review’s conclusions may have far-reaching implications for digital speech and policing practice.

Defence Considerations: Intent, Context, and Freedom of Expression

In public order and hate crime prosecutions, the question of intent and context is often pivotal.

Words or actions that appear threatening in one setting may be political, satirical, or artistic expression in another.

Similarly, protests can sometimes lead to charges where individuals are swept up by crowd behaviour or misunderstood by officers on the ground.

Defence solicitors regularly challenge the proportionality of police actions, the interpretation of “threatening” or “insulting” conduct, and whether arrests or charging decisions respect rights protected under Articles 10 and 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights – the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.

These are not just technicalities; they go to the heart of how a democratic society balances liberty and order.

The forthcoming review will therefore be closely watched by both campaigners and criminal lawyers seeking clarity and consistency in the law.

How We Can Help

As always, we will be closely monitoring any reforms in relation to public order offences and hate crime – and the implications for our clients. Call us now on 0161 477 1121 or email us.