Q&A: the hunting ban

It is possible there will be accidents, when it is impossible for a huntsman to reach his dogs in time. In these circumstances the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has made clear that there will be no prosecution, as hunts did not have “the intent” of allowing hounds to chase and kill a fox. There may well be confusion however among observers, for the hunts will look like any traditional hunt.

How are the police going to respond?

Police are certain to be visible at high-profile hunts in the urban fringe. They have made clear that policing the Hunting Act it is not a high priority, but that they will investigate if there is evidence of illegal hunting. This could be a video, a photograph or witness, and investigations may well take place after the event.

Anti-hunt campaigners have said that they will be monitoring events, and ensuring that hunts are complying with the law and that police are taking appropriate action. Anti-hunt campaigners however could also face prosecution if they trespass on private land.

Are we likely to see the Act being broken, or violent protests?

For the moment a mass campaign of civil disobedience by huntsmen appears to have receded. Instead, they have decided to test the law as it stands. The foxhunting season ends by the middle of March in most areas anyway.

Hunt supporters are expected to concentrate on the forthcoming general election, and to offer help to any parliamentary candidate who will vote to repeal the hunt ban legislation. During the summer months, hunts will attempt to retrain the hounds to follow artificial scents so that trail hunting can take place in the next hunting season.

It is possible some hotheads may decide to try and become hunt martyrs, but they will be in a minority. There have been rumours of a surprise mass protest in Parliament Square next week, and other suggestions that a hunt will take their hounds outside Parliament and shoot them. For the moment these appear to be rural myths.

Will the Government intervene?

The ball is now clearly in the Government’s court. Hunt supporters are hoping that the Attorney-General, Lord Goldsmith QC, will intervene and use his powers to delay any prosecutions under the Hunting Act until legal wranglings are over.

The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Woolf QC, said in court that the Attorney-General had the power to direct or issue guidance to the Crown Prosecution Service on this matter.

Lord Goldsmith was not in court, as he is chairing a conference of attorneys-general in the overseas territories in Anguilla. It is still unclear if he intends to take any action. His representative, Mr Clive Lewis, said that the Attorney-General did not support or oppose an application from the alliance to stay proceedings until legal action had completed its course.

Lord Woolf however made clear: “We do not think it is right that (the Attorney-General) should seek to hide behind the court on this matter” and he suggested : “He can always use his powers to give advice to the prosecution.”

If the Government wishes to avoid a confrontation with the hunting community in advance of the general election then it is in the gift of the Attorney-General. If he intervenes, however, it will infuriate Labour backbenchers who have fought so hard to secure a hunt ban, as well as upset anti-hunt organisations.

What is the next step in the courts?

The Countryside Alliance is to lodge its petition with the law lords early next week. It hopes for an expedited hearing to see if the country’s senior judges will accept the case. At this point an application to delay enforcement of the ban is expected to be made if the Attorney General has not already given instructions to the Crown Proescution Service to that effect.