London borough facing judicial review threat over road crossing painted in colours of transgender pride flag

Blessing Olubanjo, with the support of the Christian Legal Centre, claims that the installation is in breach of the Local Government Act 1986 and constitutes unlawful political messaging that infringes on her rights as a Christian.

The London borough painted the crossing in white, blue and pink at the junction of Tavistock Place and Marchmont Street in November 2021 to mark Transgender Awareness Week.

The claimant’s legal team claims the crossing breaches Section 2 of the 1986 Act, which prohibits councils from publishing material that appears to promote a political party or a politically controversial viewpoint.

Section 2 provides:

1. A local authority shall not publish [or arrange for the publication of,] any material which, in whole or in part, appears to be designed to affect public support for a political party.

2. In determining whether material falls within the prohibition regard shall be had to the content and style of the material, the time and other circumstances of publication and the likely effect on those to whom it is directed and, in particular, to the following matters—

a. whether the material refers to a political party or to persons identified with a political party or promotes or opposes a point of view on a question of political controversy which is identifiable as the view of one political party and not of another;

b. where the material is part of a campaign, the effect which the campaign appears to be designed to achieve.]

3. A local authority shall not give financial or other assistance to a person for the publication of material which the authority are prohibited by this section from publishing themselves.

Olubanjo contends that the crossing is a form of "publication" under the Act, designed to influence public opinion.

Her pre-action protocol letter also argues that the crossing represents a breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty due to known risks to disabled and neurodivergent individuals.

The challenge further contends that the installation constitutes a violation of political neutrality laws under the 1986 Act, as well as an infringement of freedom of belief and expression under the Human Rights Act 1998.

Elsewhere, the letter raised concerns that the £10,000 installation cost could represent improper use of public funds.

Andrea Williams, chief executive of the Christian Legal Centre, said: "Not only is this crossing a matter of public safety and Christian freedom, it’s about the misuse of public resources for political campaigning.

"The crossing is a visual endorsement of a contested ideology, installed by a public authority in breach of its legal duties. This is not the role of local government."

Williams called for Camden to either remove or redesign the crossing and apologise to residents and local businesses.

In a comment given to the BBC, Camden Council said it "entirely rejects" the arguments.

The council’s statement added that Camden has “a strong and continuing history of respect and support for everyone in our borough.

"We fight discrimination in all its forms and this includes being an ally to our trans residents."

Adam Carey