Executive Protection planning and responses for Protest and Heckler activity in the modern era

If you’re an Executive Protection agent or have ever worked in event management or the protective security space, you have been on the receiving end of the consequences resulting from public protests or organized heckler groups.? While protesters and hecklers typically fall under the management of protective intelligence agents during advance operations, the size and financial limitations of most modern EP teams require most teams to incorporate standardized policies and procedures for addressing these incidents with every EP team member.

In the intricate dance between civil liberties and public safety, the interactions between protest groups and private security cannot be dismissed. The dynamic nature of protests often requires a delicate balance between supporting the Constitutionally guaranteed freedom of speech and expression, while maintaining order and providing safety for the public. This article delves into the multifaceted strategies employed by protective operations professionals when responding to protest groups and hecklers and exploring the complexities, challenges, and potential outcomes inherent in these often-contentious interactions.

Understanding Protest Dynamics

Before delving into security and EP responses, it is crucial to understand the diverse nature of modern protest groups and their motivations. Protest groups are incredibly diverse, and the organizational foundations of modern protest movements includes a wide spectrum of underlying motivations, ranging from peaceful demonstrations advocating for social or political change to more confrontational and sometimes violent gatherings expressing dissent. In the United States, we often associate protest activity with groups seeking changes in government or corporate policies. While historically, protests have brought needed social change, current trends in these activities have seen shifts to fringe ideology. In recent years, large peaceful protests have sometimes devolved into uncontrolled riots in major city centers, requiring law enforcement, security agencies and business owners to incorporate significant planning for socially contentious court rulings and large public and political gatherings.? Protest activity and groups are not a uniquely American phenomenon. The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, which tracks large scale protest activity worldwide, estimates that currently in this year, 132 countries have experienced significant protest activity with 23% of those protests lasting longer than 3 months.

Protests are also unpredictable and can emerge spontaneously or be meticulously planned by various stakeholders, adding layers of complexity, and planning to security considerations. Not unlike conventional EP teams, today’s protest groups are structured, well-funded and technically trained. Groups routinely conduct surveillance of targeted venues, complete specialized training for key protest personnel and establish safety, medical and post incident legal resources for participants.

When planning major events, EP agents should always consider the possibility of protest and heckler activity impacting their established security plan and advance, regardless of the underlying reason for the activity. Motorcade route planning is one of the areas in which protests can significantly impact a protective visit. In 2023, a large civil protest closed the highway between Panama City, Panama, and the Tocumen International Airport. While the protest was directed at the Panamanian government, it also significantly impacted the logistics and transportation of thousands of people who used this major thoroughfare for transportation into and out of Panama City and the main airport servicing it.? Recent protests by farmers in Europe have significantly impacted access to key highways, bridges and city centers and government facilities while Pro and Anti Palestinian protests have disrupted higher education campuses in cities nationwide. Transportation security considerations have evolved beyond ground transportation and motorcade route security for some EP teams because of protester activity targeting corporate aircraft.? ??

General Security Concerns and Approaches

When confronted with protest activity, EP teams face a myriad of concerns beyond the protection of your own protectee, including team safety and safeguarding protective assets and resources. Consequently, security responses often involve a combination of proactive protective intelligence measures, crowd management and access control, and de-escalation techniques.

Proactive Protective Intelligence Measures: Preemptive security measures, such as intelligence collection and risk assessments, enable EP teams to anticipate potential problems and allocate manpower and resources to mitigate them.? Some protective operations teams incorporate Security Operations Centers (SOC’s) to actively monitor trip specific intelligence information prior to and during a visit by actively reviewing social media, available intelligence databases and other communication networks. In doing so, EP teams can identify emerging threats and tailor their response strategies once alerted. The use of crowd sourced AI supported intelligence databases like SamDesk, help to provide real time incident alerts to your cell phone, identifying any number of security risks you choose in a geofenced area you select. For deep dives into regional social instability and risk and travel assessments, private companies like TAM-C offer comprehensive intelligence resources and expert analysis.? When it comes to protesters, like most security threats, being proactive is always better than being reactive and the use of available databases and OSINT are increasingly standard in the EP career field.? ????

Counter Surveillance:? An excellent complement to any protective intelligence plan is the use of Counter Surveillance. Having spent a few years conducting and managing Counter Surveillance operations and teams in several cities domestically and abroad, I can personally attest to the success of this protective operations program. The use of Counter Surveillance teams has now become commonplace for larger teams and is invaluable in identifying the early warning signs of protester activity, group gatherings, movements, and staging. Counter Surveillance also allows security planners to make informed decisions based on trusted sources when altering or adjusting established protective detail movements, security staffing, entry/exit control, and motorcade routes to avoid unnecessary contact with these groups.

Crowd Management and Access Control: There are two important types of planned events that directly impacts all decision making and advance security planning for crowd management and access control:

·????? Public Events – can be attended by anyone and the area in which the event is occurring is not private property or a leased event space.

?·????? Private Events – are often ticketed with restrictive public access and occur on private property and/or a leased event space.

Recently, I worked a large private ballroom event inside a much larger public hotel space. This is a common scenario for most EP agents. Fortunately, the private event had contract security, contracted local law enforcement and controlled ticketing, but the security plan had no access control measures in place for the perimeter of the ballroom event space itself, effectively nullifying the intended security measures. After a few adjustments, our team was able to secure several perimeter entry points to the ballroom, limiting access to two doors and arranged for security screening of ticketing before entry was permitted. The change in the security posture for the room initially confused the attendees, but the adjustments limited access to the private space and provided a more secure environment for the guests.

If an event is public, anyone can gain access to the event, unrestricted, and security professionals are limited in their management of the freedom of movement of those attending. If an event is private, the event sponsor has the responsibility for crowd management and access control of those in attendance and typically has some type of ticketing or guest verification process in place, allowing entry. At private events, the space used for the event is usually owned, contracted, or leased by the sponsoring group and they have the right to say who can and cannot be in the space during the period of the event. An example would be a concert or stadium football game. While the venue may seem public because it is heavily attended, you are a guest and can be “uninvited” by the sponsoring host at any time. Running with my shirt off in a public park, while questionably offensive, will not get me kicked out of the park because it is a public space, and I did not violate any laws. Running with my shirt off onto the playing field of an NFL game will probably get some unwanted security attention and possible hospital bills.?

In addition to the type of event, EP teams should have a clear understanding of the event access control procedures and ticketing issuance policies, whether they are managing the event in totality or just visiting with their protectee. Additionally, it is imperative that all security personnel know what ticketing looks like and have exemplars for comparison. If you are aware of the names of known protesters and persons of interest, EP teams can share this information with event managers for available database resource crosschecks to identify and in some cases exclude unwanted persons of interest attempting to attend your event.

If your protectee is on stage or speaking during an event, EP teams can also consider the use of “buffers” for standoff with the attending guests. While not always appropriate, and depending on the intended intimacy of the event, buffers provide a secure area for your protectee and EP team to navigate around the stage unimpeded. A buffer is defined as the secure space created using a physical barrier (often referred to as a rope line) between the leading edge of the stage and the established public area. This space is usually 10-12 feet in depth and includes the use of anchored steel bike racks or other similar physically durable barriers.

Maintaining order within large gathering spaces and venues requires experience and specialized training in crowd control techniques and significant coordination with venue staff, law enforcement and venue security staffing. EP teams may choose to establish intermediate physical barriers within public seating areas to separate known trusted attendees from unknown public attendees, “zip tie” the first three rows of folding chairs at a public speaking event, deploy specialized security and medical response teams, and implement crowd dispersal resources. When planning for interactions with protesters, EP agents should have a clear understanding of expectations when engaging protesters, be familiar with existing federal and state laws surrounding those engagements and comply with established and communicated use of force policies.

The use of crowd screening and magnetometers is another resource used by security event managers to limit weapons, but also unauthorized items commonly used by protesters such as signage, glitter, umbrellas, and any other items that can be thrown at your protectee. The intended management of restrictive screening practices for events should be carefully coordinated with event planners and the venue staff so there are no misunderstandings. Some judicial districts also require signage to notify the public, prior to entry, of restricted items and conduct.

Heckler Policy: Any physical response to a protest or heckler must be proportionate and guided by the principles of necessity to avoid exacerbating tensions and later litigation. You “might” be sued, but you “will” be filmed, and that film will never reflect your response favorably. An effective tool that is often used in the management of protesters who attempt to disrupt publicly attended meetings and speaking events is a called a “Heckler Policy.” These policies are a set of guidelines detailing security and staff response and removal of protesters who verbally or otherwise attempt to disrupt events. As mentioned, most indoor venues are privately paid for and public guests at the event are there at the invitation of the person or organization leasing the space for the event. As such, sponsoring person(s) and organizations can “uninvite” the guest when sufficient coordination, communication and planning are completed. The ideal scenario is to pair a representative from the event staff with a police officer or uniformed security guard and approach the heckler or protester, asking them to leave the event. Once uninvited, the guest is then escorted from the venue and outside the security perimeter. The use of law enforcement is highly effective when a protester refuses to leave, because once they are asked, and they do not, they are effectively trespassing. As protests have evolved, protest groups have recognized the effectiveness and limitations of Heckler Policies and structured their confrontations in stages to extend disruptions. As one protester is engaged with staff and security and escorted out, another then stands and begins their protest, and this continues until there are no more protesters in the venue. Despite removal, protester activity rarely results in arrest unless they commit a crime. Regardless, effective planning for hecklers and protesters inside your event should always be considered.

Effective communications before any event with your protectee and their staff regarding your planned responses to protesters inside an event is key to alleviate confusion when the disruption occurs. Most VIP’s do not want to be viewed as weak or fearful when attacked verbally by confrontational groups and individuals during speaking events and they will usually wish to remain onstage until the disruption has concluded, or it is resolved. Having that conversation before you cover and evacuate your protectee can alleviate an awkward conversation backstage.?

UAS/UAV and Counter UAS/UAV Technology: ?An Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) is the totality of everything that makes an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) work, including its GPS module, ground control module, transmission systems, camera, software, and the person on the ground controlling the vehicle. UAV’s often have payloads beyond camera systems and are frequently used by protest groups to disrupt or film targeted events and activities. When planning for UAV interventions, EP teams should always focus on identifying the operator. Control modules for drones are difficult to hide and must be within a specified distance to the UAV to operate effectively. The FAA maintains strict regulatory oversight of UAV flight operations and mandates that a UAV remote pilot must take steps for safety by applying a risk-based approach to ensure that:

·????? The UAV must not fly over 400 feet above the ground or any structure, must weigh less than 55 lbs. and must transmit an identification number.

·????? Operators must avoid other aircraft.

·????? Operators must never operate in a careless or reckless manner.

·????? Operators must keep drones within sight. If you use First Person View or similar technology, you must have a visual observer always keep your drone within unaided sight, without an FAA waiver (for example, no binoculars).

·????? Operators cannot be a pilot or visual observer for more than one drone operation at a time.

·????? Operators must not fly a drone over people, without an FAA waiver, unless they are directly participating in the drone’s operation. (This is important for EP Teams)

Counter UAS/UAV technologies have developed as fast as UAVs; however, the use of such technologies is far grayer than the operation of the aircraft. Counter UAS/UAV capabilities fall into two broad categories: “Non-Kinetic” and “Kinetic.” Non-kinetic disruption is the non-physical measure used to disrupt or disable a UAS/UAV, including transmitted RF, Wi-Fi, or Global Positioning System (GPS) jamming, spoofing, hacking, and non-destructive directed energy devices.

Kinetic solutions may employ a variety of measures capable of physically disrupting or disabling a UAS/UAV, including nets, projectiles, and lasers. The use of non-kinetic or kinetic solutions may violate U.S. federal criminal laws and prohibitions against, among other things, intercepting and interfering with telecommunications, damaging a protected computer, and damaging an aircraft. Other safety considerations include the use of such devices potentially causing physical harm to people or property on the ground when the UAS/UAV signal is disrupted. While courts and legislative bodies are still considering this technology, the legal use of such devices has been strictly limited to the military and federal government.

If you report violations of UAV/UAS operation to law enforcement, or even recover a drone at an event, expect little to no action.? Most state legislatures have not addressed the increased use of drones and policing agencies have no laws they can enforce when responding.? EP agents should identify the drone through its registration number and report the operator to the local FAA flight standards district office in your area.? The FAA's investigators will investigate your report and follow up with the drone operator. Unauthorized drone operators are subject to penalties and federal criminal charges. ??

De-escalation Techniques: No one reading this is Mother Theresa and no one expects you to be. When confronted with violent and confrontational behavior, each of us relies on our experience and training to resolve the situation. While recognizing the obvious potential for escalation when managing protesters, EP agents should also be trained in de-escalation strategies aimed at defusing tense situations and promoting dialogue. Protesters expect law enforcement and security responses and record the activity hoping for physical confrontations.? Building rapport through honest communications with protest organizers and leadership, communicating your expectations verbally (before enacting action), identifying activity that will create negative responses from security staffing and offering avenues for peaceful resolution can help prevent confrontations from spiraling out of control. Regardless, it is important to understand that despite your best planning, protesters have their own plan, and it is often not shared or telegraphed to EP agents. Like security, protesters have designated position descriptions and taskings, some of which are expected to result in law enforcement contact and arrest regardless of your best efforts to avoid those situations. These positions are designed to push and disobey the directions of law enforcement and security until they are physically challenged and stopped.? Protesters also follow the policy that if it isn’t seen, it didn’t happen, so most planned protests have designated media staffing who remain outside of any negative interactions with security personnel to film the event in its entirety (with positive editing of course).? While the goals of the protesters may not align with security goals, when available, open communications and abatement with protesters can sometimes avoid larger negative issues.

Legal Concerns:

The adage “Your rights’ end where mine begin” is a true statement, however, the line between the two is usually blurred and entangled. Today’s protectors must be educated in the legalities of protest behavior, mitigations, and remedies. Last year in New York, a group of protesters descended on the retail store of a popular women’s fashion line and conducted a “sit in,” effectively closing the store for business. While groups have the right to be heard, they are limited by the same laws that allow them to conduct their protest activities to begin with. While protesters may gather in “public” spaces and speak, they may not interfere with the freedom and movement of others in the same space, cause property damage or physically block public access to a location.

A favorite defense tactic for attorneys representing protesters is the frequently used and often unsuccessful “My client didn’t know it was a private event” argument.? Despite knowingly circumventing established physical and manned security features, protesters will claim they had “no idea” they were not allowed entry to an event.? Common sense and legal argument rarely go hand in hand, so it incumbent for event planners to establish identifiably restrictive security measures to nullify this contention.? It is also just as important for EP teams visiting an event they did not plan, to identify “holes” in established security.? This is one of the many reasons for conducting “walkthroughs” of sites during your protective advance.?

In the now famous U.S. Supreme Court decision Moss v. United States Secret Service, U.S. Secret Service agents were sued by a protest group for directing state and local police in Jacksonville, Oregon to move an anti-Bush picket line of approximately 250 protesters while allowing a group of pro-Bush demonstrators to remain in the same area undisturbed.? This incident came on the heels of several other jurisdictions establishing “protest or free speech zones” during large political events, effectively isolating protesters in a predetermined space and violating their 1st Amendment rights to free speech.? In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the protest group could not sue the Secret Service agents for their decision to have them moved blocks away from, and out of the earshot of, the President because the court could not determine if there was an overriding safety concern by the agency. While the U.S. Secret Service won the case, it caused federal and local law enforcement agencies to correct long standing policies for preventing protesters from entering “public” spaces. Effectively, if the public can access an area, protesters can also access the same area. As protectors, it is important to understand this distinction between public and private spaces mentioned throughout this article. You cannot differentiate between those you “want” and those you don’t want in public spaces, but you can for private and secure spaces.?

Conclusion

The interaction between protest groups and EP agents epitomizes the intricate balance between freedom and order in free societies. While security responses are guided by the imperative to uphold public safety, they must also respect the fundamentals of human rights and the letter of the law. By embracing a holistic approach that combines proactive advance and security measures, crowd management and access control, and de-escalation techniques, EP teams can navigate the complexities of protest dynamics with greater efficacy and legitimacy. ?

If you’re interested in more professional EP related topics and educational tools, visit the FREE Board of Executive Protection Professionals (BEPP) ?Page at https://www.ep-board.org/ep-resources

#BEPP?#settinganewstandard?#ep?#eptraining?#executiveprotection?#bodyguards?#closeprotection?#securitymanagement?#protectiveintelligence?#CloseProtectionConference #PrivateSecurity #BodyGuard #PrivateProtection #SelfDefense #Security #CloseProtection #Protector #samdesk #tam-c