Miss Elizabeth Neville QPM MA PhD CHIEF CONSTABLE OF WILTSHIRE
Police Headquarters
London Road, Devizes, SN10 2DN
Tel: 01380 72234l Fax: 0I380 734176
24 March 1999

Dear Richard [Chief Executive, Salisbury District Council]
I am writing to you in respect of arrangements for the 1999 Summer Solstice. During 1998 English Heritage and the Wiltshire Police continued a constructive dialogue with most of the groups who had consistently shown interest in Stonehenge and in the performing of rituals there. This rapport was extended through the granting of access to the monument on notable dates, particularly the Winter Solstice and the Equinoxes. Things had progressed sufficiently well to allow access to be granted for the Summer Solstice to a group of 100 who had applied to English Heritage. This group included local residents as well as astronomers, archaeologists, druids, pagans and travelers. The event passed off peacefully and was deemed a success.

Since then further progress has been made. There have been regular meetings with representatives of groups interested in Stonehenge and there continues to be regular access to the monument. This culminated with 208 celebrants being granted access for last weekend's Spring Equinox, all of whom left peacefully at the conclusion of the celebrations.

The recent House of Lords judgment in the case of DPP v Jones & Lloyd has caused me to reconsider my views on the appropriateness of a Trespassory Assembly Order under Section 14A of the Public Order Act 1986. In that judgment, Lord Irvine articulated the public's right to use the public highway for any reasonable purpose providing it does not cause a nuisance or obstruction. In view of this judgment, I do not intend to apply for a Trespassory Assembly Order for the Summer Solstice period in 1999. Our policing strategy will encompass this most recent decision, the need to protect the Stonehenge site and to facilitate access for those entitled to it.

I am of the view that my decision presents a significant opportunity for all those who have a deep interest in Stonehenge and the celebration of the Summer Solstice. It is hoped that we have moved on from the days of confrontation and mass policing. However, the onus will rest on those who intend to come to Stonehenge for the Solstice. The policing operation will ensure a positive response from my officers should any incidents of disorder occur over the Solstice period. Furthermore, any outbreak of disorder would jeopardize the very real progress that has been made. It would, in all probability mean that I would have to revert to the use of the powers available to me under the Public Order Act, 1986 during the Millennium Year, in particular those significant calendar events commencing with New Year's Day, 2000.

I would also like to assure you that should I receive any intelligence to suggest that there may be planned incidents of disorder or trespass I will then consider making an emergency application for a Trespassory Assembly Order. I trust that will not be the case and that this Summer Solstice will not only prove to be an enjoyable and peaceful event, but also the herald of a new period of tranquil and harmonious celebrations at Stonehenge.

Yours sincerely
[Elizabeth]

R K Sheard Esq Chief Executive Salisbury District Council The Council House Bourne Hill Salisbury Wiltshire SPI 3UZ

OPEN - FOR GENERAL RELEASE Agenda item 9
Meeting of : Northern Area Committee
Date: I5th April 1999
Report of: Solicitor to the Council
Subject: Stonehenge Summer Solstice I999

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The purpose of this report is to explain to Members of the Committee why an order prohibiting the holding of all Trespassory assemblies on land adjoining the Monument at Stonehenge during the Summer Solstice period will not be made this year.
2. BACKGROUND
2.1 In recent years the Chief Constable of Wiltshire has applied to the Council for prohibition orders under the Public Order Act 1986 as amended (`the Act').
3. SUMMER SOLSTICE 1999
3.1 This year, however, the Chief Constable of Wiltshire has written to the Council explaining why she does not intend to apply for a Trespassory Assembly Order for the Summer Solstice period in I999. A copy of the Chief Constable's letter is appended to this report.
4. FURTHER PROGRESS
4.1 You will note that the Chief Constable's letter maps out the further progress made to achieving normality with Stonehenge during the Summer Solstice period by allowing anyone with a specific interest in Stonehenge access but without a recurrence of the problems that have arisen in the past. This has been achieved by sustained constructive dialogue between English Heritage; the Wiltshire Police and most of the groups interested in Stonehenge and the performing of rituals there.
5. RECENT HOUSE OF LORDS JUDGMENT
5.1 The Chief Constable's principal reason for not applying for an Order is based on a recent House of Lords judgment.
Facts
5.2 Further to a Trespassory Assembly Order made by the Council in I995 relating to the monument at Stonehenge, the defendants in the case were arrested and subsequently convicted of taking part in a `Trespassory assembly' under sl4(B)(2) of the Act.
The central issue
5.3 The central issue turned on the question of what were the "limits" of the public's right of access to the public highway.
The judgment
5.4 The majority decision of the House of Lords (3:2) allowed the defendants' appeal.
5.5 The Lord Chancellor espoused the view that the law today should recognise that the public highway was a public place on which all manner of reasonable activities might go on. In his opinion, provided those activities were reasonable, did not involve the commission of a public or private nuisance and did not amount to an obstruction of the highway unreasonably impeding the primary right of the general public to pass and repass they should not constitute a trespass. Subject to those qualifications there would be a right of peaceful assembly on the highway.
5.6 The Lord Chancellor said that the public highway was a public place that the public might enjoy for any reasonable purpose. In every case the Magistrates' Court had to decide as a matter of fact and degree whether the use had been reasonable and not inconsistent with the right to pass and repass.

Click here to go to our 1999 Stonehenge Summer Solstice page