The Home Office’s decision to ban
Palestine Action under
terrorism legislation was unlawful, the
High Court has ruled in a humiliating blow for the government that could lead to the collapse of hundreds of criminal prosecutions against supporters of the group.
Huda Ammori, co-founder of the group, celebrated a “monumental victory” on Friday after Justice Victoria Sharp said that the proscription of Palestine Action was “disproportionate”, and that it “did result in a very significant interference with the right to freedom of speech and the right to freedom of assembly”.
Three senior judges concluded that only a very small number of
Palestine Action’s activities amounted to terrorism, and that the group’s acts had not crossed the high bar to make it a terrorist organisation.
The ban remains in place for now and the government has said it will appeal, but the Metropolitan Police said officers would no longer arrest people simply for
showing support for Palestine Action and will instead “focus on gathering evidence of those offences...to provide opportunities for enforcement at a later date”. They admitted that these “are unusual circumstances”.
The ruling means it is still a criminal offence to support or be a member of Palestine Action, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Since the proscription last July,
thousands of people have been arrested for holding up placards in support of the group.
Lawyers for Ms Ammori and the Home Office have till the 20 February to provide further submissions to the court ahead of more hearings that will decide whether the ban should be lifted, and whether the case will head to the Court of Appeal.
As news came through of the judges’ decision on Friday morning, about a hundred people gathered outside the Royal Courts of Justice building in central London started cheering and chanting “Free Palestine”.
In their judgement, Dame Victoria Sharp, Mr Justice Swift and Mrs Justice Steyn described Palestine Action as a group that “promotes its political cause through criminality and encouragement of criminality”, but said that criminal law is sufficient to prosecute these acts.
The Independent revealed
yesterday that the Home Office has spent £700,000 in legal fees so far fighting Ms Ammori’s case.
Then-home secretary
Yvette Cooper took the decision to ban the group under terror laws after activists broke into an RAF base and damaged two military aircraft. The High Court judges said in their ruling that Ms Cooper had failed to consider whether imposing a terror ban on Palestine Action was “proportionate” to the threat posed by the organisation. Justice Sharp wrote that, by doing this, Ms Cooper had made a “significant” error by failing to follow the Home Office’s own policy on proscription.
The High Court judges suggested in the ruling that “the strength of the case for proscription may need to considered further by the home secretary”.
Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, in 2021 (Peace Pledge Union/YouTube)
During the court case, Ms Ammori’s lawyers insisted that Palestine Action does not advocate for violence, saying any examples of serious violence against property or person “are not the norm, they are rare”.
Ms Ammori responded to the news on Friday, saying that the ruling was a “monumental victory for both our fundamental freedoms here in Britain and in the struggle for freedom for the Palestinian people”.
She added: “It would be profoundly unjust for the government to try to delay or stop the High Court’s proposed order quashing this ban while the futures of these thousands of people hang in the balance, many of whom are elderly or disabled and facing up to 14 years’ imprisonment for this entirely peaceful protest.”
More than 2,000 people have been arrested for holding signs since the ban took affect and nearly 700 people have been charged with a terrorism offence for supporting Palestine Action, although no-one has yet been convicted.
Home secretary
Shabana Mahmood said she was “disappointed” by the High Court’s ruling, adding: “I intend to fight this judgement in the Court of Appeal.”
Shadow home secretary Chris Philp welcomed the decision to appeal, saying Palestine Action’s campaign was “built on intimidation, destruction, and violence.”
Outside of the Royal Courts of Justice, there was confusion between Metropolitan Police officers and activists as dozens of people carried signs that read “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action”.
Activist Grace Lally asked two liaison officers if it was illegal to hold the sign, with the officers replying: “We can ask”.
People charged with supporting the group said they feel in “limbo” after the High Court decision. Angie Zelter, 74, said she faces charges over holding a placard at demonstrations last year and is due at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Tuesday.
She said the situation is “up in the air”, adding: “We don’t really know where we are”.
Akiko Hart, director of human rights organisation Liberty, said they welcomed the court’s finding but said “the practical effect will depend on the government’s appeal”.
Lui Asquith, associate in the public law team at law firm Russell-Cooke, said, while routine, the ruling was “an oddity” as “the rights-infringing proscription stands until the court stays otherwise”. She explained that the Home Office could argue for the ban to remain in place for longer until the appeal is heard.
Amanda Weston KC, a member of the Independent Commission on UK Counter-Terrorism Law, Policy and Practice, said the ruling was a “solid judgment” which will be difficult to appeal. However, until a decision to quash the ban is decided, it leaves matters “up in the air” for protesters facing prosecution for supporting Palestine Action.
Baroness Shami Chakrabarti said the judgement made clear that “the decision to proscribe the whole organisation and its many peaceful supporters was disproportionate”, adding: “Let those engaged in criminal damage be prosecuted but don’t make peaceful protestors guilty by association”.
Yasmine Ahmed
, UK director of Human Rights Watch, said that the verdict was a “shot in the arm for British democracy”.
Areeba Hamid, a director at Greenpeace UK, said the government’s use of terror laws had been “the stuff of dystopian novels”. She added: “The Crown Prosecution Service should immediately drop the terror charges against the peaceful protesters who opposed this ban”.
The Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council said they were “deeply concerned” by the High Court ruling, saying that the “practical impact of Palestine Action’s activities on Jewish communal life has been significant and deeply unsettling”.
but eroticism doesn't require nudity. Using another Kate song to prove my point.
