Palestine Action proscription is lawful, Court of Appeal rules

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.

The judge later said that comparisons to groups such as the suffragettes were “seriously flawed”.

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 the appeal, Sir James Eadie KC said in written submissions for the Home Office that “the line between criminality, sometimes violent criminality, and terrorism is not a bright one”, and that the criminal law had “demonstrably failed” to prevent the escalation of the group’s activities.

But Raza Husain KC, for Ammori, said in written submissions that the High Court was right to find that the ban on the group did not correctly balance the human rights involved and that the ban on Palestine Action has created a “culture of fear” among campaigners for Palestinian rights.

Hundreds of people have been arrested across multiple demonstrations after holding up placards and wearing badges and t-shirts declaring support for Palestine Action.

The Chief Magistrate has put a pause on the progress of criminal cases for those charged, with a review hearing due to take place on June 30.

Protesters outside the court shouted “shame” as the verdict was delivered.

Speaking outside court, Green Party peer Baroness [Jenny] Jones said listening to the verdict be delivered was “infuriating”.

She said: “Standing here, listening to the judge, was just infuriating. The person speaking spoke about things like national security, and I would argue that national security is much more under threat if you suppress people who have a valid view of what the Government is doing.

“There’s also the fact, of course, that the judge mentioned the suffragettes, and let’s not forget that the suffragettes have been justified in their behaviour, and some of what they did was throw bombs and smash things up, which actually isn’t quite as far as Palestine Action’s gone.

“So I would argue that suffragettes were a bigger danger. And yet, all these years later, we know that they were right.”

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.

“This unprecedented abuse of power has devastated the lives of thousands of people while silencing dissent over Israel’s slaughter of the Palestinian people during the genocide, when that dissent could not be more urgent.

“This is the first time in British history that a civil disobedience group has been proscribed as a ‘terrorist’ organisation, placing Palestine Action alongside Isis and Boko Haram despite the fact that we do not advocate violence and exist to save lives by disrupting the supply of weapons used by Israel against the Palestinian people.”

Ammori continued: “Throughout these proceedings, the government accepted that this proscription was based on property damage, not violence against people, as was reflected in the Court of Appeal’s judgment today.

“By the government’s own logic, the Suffragettes, anti-Apartheid activists and the anti-war direct action groups that Keir Starmer himself once defended as a lawyer could have been labelled ‘terrorists’.

“The British public knows that taking action to save lives is not terrorism.

“We were banned because Palestine Action’s campaign against Israel’s largest weapons manufacturer, Elbit Systems, cost the company millions of pounds in profits and contributed to the loss of lucrative contracts.

“This proscription has always been about protecting the interests of weapons manufacturers and appeasing pro-Israel lobbying groups, not about countering terrorism.”

She added she has been “in awe of the courage shown by thousands of people” who have protested and been arrested in the wake of the ban, adding: “It is clear that thousands of people will continue to defy this absurdly authoritarian ban and the police have already said they do not have capacity to arrest everyone who defies it, showing the proscription is simply unsustainable and that, ultimately, there is too much opposition for it to be enforced.”

In a statement, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood, said: “The Court of Appeal’s judgment upholds the proscription of Palestine Action.

“The Court has found that Palestine Action has carried out acts of terrorism, celebrated those who have taken part in those acts and promoted the use of violence. It is not an ordinary protest or civil disobedience group, and its actions are not consistent with democratic values and the rule of law.

“This decision does not affect lawful protest in support of the Palestinian cause, which remains a fundamental democratic right. There is a difference between supporting Palestine and supporting a proscribed terrorist group.

“We will always take the strongest possible action to protect our national security and keep the public safe.”

It is understood that the Home Office intends to “robustly defend” the ruling against any appeal.

The ruling comes after four activists linked with Palestine Action were jailed last week over a break-in at the Elbit Systems factory near Bristol in August 2024, before the group was proscribed.

Charlotte Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, were in an old prison van which crashed into the site.

The activists, all wearing red boilersuits, used sledgehammers and crowbars to destroy computers, drones and other equipment before police and security intervened.

Corner, a former student at Oxford, struck police officer Kate Evans twice on the back with a seven-pound sledgehammer, leaving her with a fractured spine.

At Woolwich Crown Court on Friday, Mr Justice Johnson jailed Corner for seven years and eight months, telling him he had used “extreme and gratuitous force against a vulnerable police officer acting in the course of her duties”.

Head, who drove the prison van into the compound, was sentenced to five years in prison, while Kamio was also handed a five-year jail term, and Rajwani received a prison sentence of four years and eight months.

Each defendant will also spend an extra year on licence once their prison terms have ended.

The judge said they had “decided to take matters into your own hands” after coming to the view that the Israeli government is committing genocide in Gaza and being “disillusioned” with legal efforts to oppose it.

He said the activists had been “reckless” about who would be injured and had been heavily involved in organising the raid with the right of veto over each part of the plan.

The judge pointed out that two of the activists had livestreamed the raid and posted the footage to social media, as part of an effort to “glorify criminality and vigilantism”.

Supporters of the defendants cheered and banged on the front of the public gallery as the sentences were passed.

Earlier on Friday, the judge ruled that the raid amounted to an “act of terrorism”, having been carried out to try to influence the UK Government and intimidate a section of the public.

Rajwani and Head were seen breaking down crying after the judge made his decision.

The ruling means the four activists will serve at least two-thirds of their sentences for criminal damage behind bars, and will have to face Parole Board hearings to secure their release from prison.

They are also expected to be subjected to extra monitoring once out of jail, and will spend an extra year on licence after the end of their prison terms.