Immigration Minister Mike Tapp has labelled Owen Jones a “man child” and told him to “get a real job” amid an online spat over his challenge to Green leader Zack Polanski to disavow Palestine Action.
The Court of Appeals ruled in favour of the Home Office on Monday to uphold the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist group, making the invitation of support for it a criminal offence.
Polanski took to X that afternoon to criticise the decision, writing: “This government’s branding of protest as 'terrorism' has seen grandparents arrested and dragged through the courts simply for holding up signs.
“It's deeply authoritarian when people are speaking out against a genocide and for a free Palestine.”
Tapp then responded by asking Polanski directly: “Do you support the Palestine Action group?”
However, Jones then waded into the row, accusing Tapp of trying to trick his political rival into incriminating himself.
"The more I think about this, the more shocking it gets,” he wrote.
“A government minister asked a political opponent a question, knowing that if he answered ‘yes’, he would be arrested and potentially imprisoned.
“That's thanks to his government's unhinged law. It is so disturbing!”
It is not necessarily the case that any expression of support for a proscribed group is an offence. Under the Terrorism Act 2000, only the invitation of support for a group, expression of support in a manner reckless as to whether it encourages others to support it or the displaying of an article (e.g. a sign) that could arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual supports it are criminalised.
Tapp then replied by claiming he had received a torrent of “unhinged, shameful and disturbing” from “the extreme left” online.
But Jones doubled down, accusing Tapp of “pretending you are a victim of antisemitism, which you conflate with opposing genocide”, and told him to “grow up”, before adding: “You’re a government minister trying to get your political opponent arrested.”
Tapp then ended the exchange, writing: “I’m being told to grow up by the one man child who continues to preach student politics.
"Let’s face it, everything you do is aimed at outrage in a bid to make money - get a real job.”
It comes after judges at the Court of Appeal said on Monday that the proscription was a “justified and proportionate” interference on freedom of expression rights.
In a summary of the decision, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr said the High Court had “materially understated the position” when considering how much latitude the Home Secretary had when deciding whether to proscribe.
Carr, sitting with Sir Geoffrey Vos, Lord Justice Edis, Lord Justice Lewis and Lady Justice Whipple, continued: “There is a distinction between the expression of an opinion or belief that is supportive of the objective of an organisation… and an expression of an opinion or belief that is supportive of an organisation itself.”
She added it was accepted that there are many people who may be subjected to a “chilling effect as a direct result of this proscription decision”.
Carr concluded: “We recognise the proscription of an organisation like Palestine Action is highly controversial.
“We recognise too that Palestine Action is supported by many otherwise lawful citizens. But it is a fundamental mistake to overlook the fact that Palestine Action overtly promotes unlawful violence amounting to terrorism.
“It is not – as claimed – a direct action civil disobedience protest group like the suffragettes, operating transparently in the open.
“It is a covert organisation which operates with secret cells to avoid the detection and prosecution of those using violence to destroy property and cause injury.”
In a statement following the ruling, Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori said that she intended to take the case to the UK Supreme Court.
She said: “We are surprised by today’s judgment, after a panel of senior judges on the High Court, including the President of the King’s Bench Division, decisively ruled that the Government acted unlawfully in proscribing Palestine Action because of the significant interference with the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly.
“We will fight this all the way. We will seek permission to appeal to the Supreme Court and, if need be, take this to the European Court of Human Rights.
“We are confident we will ultimately succeed because criminalising peaceful political protest in this way is a flagrant violation of our fundamental rights and freedoms in Britain, protected in the Human Rights Act, which enshrines the European Convention of Human Rights.
“We will not stop fighting to overturn one of the most extreme attacks on free speech and the right to protest in modern British history."
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.