The Court of Appeal has dismissed Stephen Bennett’s appeal over his conviction for obstructing the passage of the Israeli Ambassador’s car during a protest outside the Israeli Embassy in Dublin.
In a judgment delivered by Mr Justice Mahon on 25 January 2018, the court upheld the High Court’s decision that the District Court judge had applied the correct legal principles to the facts of Bennett’s case. It did not hold that every peaceful protest causing an obstruction lacks a lawful authority or reasonable excuse.
The case arose from a protest on Pembroke Road on 8 July 2014, held after Israeli military air strikes on Gaza city. Bennett and another protester lay on the public road to obstruct the Ambassador’s car and an accompanying unmarked Garda car. Gardaí directed them to stop under section 8 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994. Bennett was removed from the road and resisted passively. The obstruction lasted about 20 seconds, ending after Garda intervention.
Bennett was prosecuted under section 9, which makes it an offence to wilfully prevent or interrupt the free passage of a person or vehicle in a public place without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The District Court rejected his argument that the prosecution had not proved the absence of a reasonable excuse, convicted him and imposed a five-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months on conditions.
The District Court judge had considered safety, security and sensitivity concerns, the Ambassador’s access to the embassy, possible risks to people nearby and the possibility that the protest could provoke unlawful acts. She also found that Bennett did not voluntarily stop when directed and had to be removed.
The High Court answered the legal question in the case stated in the negative, applying the District Court’s findings to the particular incident. The Court of Appeal said that answer meant the District Court judge was entitled to find that this obstruction was without lawful authority or reasonable excuse. The appeal challenged the High Court’s treatment of the question and its handling of the defence.
The Court of Appeal noted that there may be peaceful protests where a trial judge finds the prosecution has not rebutted a defence of reasonable excuse. It said such circumstances did not arise on the findings in Bennett’s case, and dismissed the appeal.