So now we know, Parliament is filled with complete boobies. They pass an act to catch one particular guy and draft it so incompetently that they can’t actually catch that guy. But they have removed yet another of our liberties in the process. Well done guys, well done. But here’s a further question:

An attempt was made to
rectify the mistake in June through a commencement order which stated
that the law applied to all demonstrators whether "starting" or
"continuing" their protests.

But
the judges ruled that this type of secondary legislation could not be
used to criminalise Mr Haw, who has been protesting in Parliament
Square since June 2001.

Lady
Justice Smith said she was "surprised" that it had been suggested that
such an order could be used "to criminalise conduct which would not
otherwise be criminal".

Now it depends on who you talk to but some say that Nu Labour has introduced some thousand new criminal offenses since Year Zero in 1997. How many of these were brought in under such secondary legislation and how many are therefore invalid?

Any legal types out there want to let us know?

In further news, Tim Ireland has a protest starting on Monday, the day the new rules come into effect. If you’re in or around London and fancy getting arrested in defense of the liberties of us all you might want to be there. No, that getting arrested isn’t jocular or dismissive. Either the rozzers enforce the law and arrest people or they don’t and it’s a dead letter. If people are arrested then hope for a proper trial and go for jury nullification, in which case the law is a dead letter.

Or we have taken another step on our way to a police state, in which questioning or even annoying our Lords and Masters is verboten.