Human rights lawyers hailed a House of Lords ruling on free speech and protest rights today as a "wake-up call for democracy".

Five Law Lords allowed an appeal by anti-war protesters who were prevented from attending a demonstration at RAF Fairford in March 2003, just hours before the Gloucestershire base was used for bombing raids on Iraq.

Lord Bingham of Cornhill, giving the lead judgment, said the case raised "important questions on the right of the private citizen to demonstrate against Government policy and the powers of the police to curtail exercise of that right".

The Lords ruled unanimously that the police had acted unlawfully and that freedom of expression was "an essential foundation of democratic society".

Jane Laporte, one the 120 coach passengers forcibly returned to London by police after being stopped in Lechlade, Gloucestershire, said outside the House of Lords: "I am absolutely overjoyed.

"The Lords have confirmed that freedom to protest is something that should be treasured in this country and police don’t have the right to take it away."

The test case against the Gloucestershire Police was brought in Ms Laporte’s name after the campaigners, who had travelled in three coaches to attend the authorised demonstration at the airbase, were stopped and searched and then asked to reboard the coaches.

The doors were then sealed by police who escorted them in convoy back to London, not even allowing toilet stops and causing what Lord Bingham described as "acute physical discomfort and embarrassment" to many of the women passengers.

Both the High Court and Court of Appeal ruled that the forced return was unlawful, but approved the police’s decision to turn back the protesters.

John Halford, a human rights specialist at Bindman and Partners, who represented the campaigners, said: "The House of Lords judgment is a wake-up call for democracy.

"Under this Government we have seen a sad and steady erosion of the rights that underpin democracy: those to express dissent and to do so collectively with others in public."

He said the Lords had ruled that the Human Rights Act had brought what Lord Bingham described as a "constitutional shift", creating for the first time a right to protest which previous law had been "reluctant and hesitant" to acknowledge.

Gloucestershire Police said they were "disappointed" at today’s judgment and defended their decision to stop the coaches.

"Policing in scenarios such as those faced at Fairford is difficult and complex, with competing rights and responsibilities having to be assessed and acted upon in real time by operational commanders," the force said.

Alex Gask, legal officer for human rights group Liberty, which had intervened as an interested party in the appeal, said: "Nothing less than our freedom of speech was at stake in this case.

"Unmerited concerns (on the part of the police) about some future ‘breach of the peace’ cannot justify the denial of this fundamental right."

Explore Law

• Corporate Law

• Public Law

• Columnists

• Law Panel

• Student Law

• Law Reports

Times Recommends

• Legal services 'cut to the bone' as crunch hits
• British judges reject US-style civil damages
• Applegarth escapes threat of legal action