The High Court has granted Palestine Action permission for a judicial review of its controversial proscription as a terrorist organisation, in a significant legal victory for the direct action group that could see the ban overturned as early as September. The ruling by Justice Martin Chamberlain comes as UN Human Rights Chief Volker Türk condemned the UK government’s use of counter-terrorism legislation as “disproportionate and unnecessary.”
The court’s decision on Wednesday marks a crucial development in the legal battle that began when Home Secretary Yvette Cooper moved to ban the pro-Palestinian protest group following an incident at RAF Brize Norton on 20 June. Palestine Action activists had broken into the military base and spray-painted two Voyager aircraft, causing an estimated £7 million ($8.9 million) in damage.
Justice Chamberlain’s ruling, delivered after more than a week of deliberation, sided with Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, determining that her legal challenge should proceed to a full judicial review hearing. The judge is expected to decide this afternoon whether to grant a stay on the proscription until the judicial review reaches a verdict, potentially suspending the ban immediately.
UN Condemns UK’s ‘Disturbing’ Use of Terror Laws
In an unprecedented intervention on Friday, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Volker Türk described the proscription as a “disturbing misuse” of UK counter-terrorism legislation that risks hindering the legitimate exercise of fundamental freedoms across Britain.
“The decision appears disproportionate and unnecessary,” Türk stated. According to international standards, terrorist acts should be confined to criminal acts intended to cause death or serious injury or to the taking of hostages, for purpose of intimidating a population.
The UN rights chief urged the UK government to “rescind its decision to proscribe Palestine Action and halt investigations and further proceedings against protesters who have been arrested on the basis of this proscription.” He also called for a comprehensive review of Britain’s counter-terrorism legislation to bring it in line with international human rights standards.
Mass Arrests Follow Parliamentary Vote
The proscription came into effect on 5 July after MPs voted overwhelmingly 385-26 in favour of adding Palestine Action to the list of banned organisations alongside al-Qaeda, ISIS and National Action. The decision followed a controversial parliamentary procedure where Palestine Action was bundled together with two neo-Nazi groups – Maniacs Murder Cult and Russian Imperial Movement – forcing MPs to vote on all three organisations together.
Since the ban took effect, more than 300 people have been arrested under the Terrorism Act 2000 for expressing support for Palestine Action. Those detained include a priest, octogenarians, and a magistrate, with many arrested for simply holding signs supporting the group.
We say the proscription of Palestine Action is repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the ECHR,” barrister Raza Husain KC told the High Court during last week’s hearing, describing the ban as “an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.
Chilling Effect on Press and Public
The court heard evidence that the proscription has created widespread confusion and fear, with at least one person being told by police that support for the Palestinian cause in general is now a terror offence. People have been stopped for wearing T-shirts or holding signs with slogans similar to those used by Palestine Action supporters.
In a witness statement submitted to the court, Novara Media reported that the ban has had “a stifling effect” on journalism, with the lack of clarity around the law posing “a real threat to press freedom” in Britain. The media organisation warned that journalists now face uncertainty when reporting on Palestine Action’s activities.
The legislation makes membership of or support for Palestine Action a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Even wearing clothing or badges bearing the group’s name can result in a six-month prison sentence.
Legal Challenge Reveals Intelligence Assessment
During the judicial review hearing on 22 July, the court heard that an intelligence assessment conducted before Palestine Action’s proscription found that “the vast majority” of the group’s activities were lawful. Husain revealed that of Palestine Action’s at least 385 documented actions over five years, the Home Secretary accepted that only three would meet the statutory definition of terrorism.
The home secretary accepts that only three of Palestine Action’s at least 385 actions would meet the statutory definition of terrorism,” Husain stated in written submissions, adding that this assessment was itself “dubious.
Blinne Ní Ghrálaigh KC, also representing Ammori, highlighted cases including protesters near the BAE Systems factory in Lancashire who were ordered by police to remove “Free Palestine” shirts due to potential breach of the proscription order. She also cited the case of Laura Murton, who was threatened with arrest by armed police for holding a Palestinian flag alongside “Free Gaza” signs.
Government Defence Focuses on Process
Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Home Office, acknowledged that “most of Palestine Action’s activities were not terrorism” but argued that “the incidents are serious and they’re escalating.” The government’s defence focused primarily on procedural arguments, maintaining that the appropriate mechanism for challenging proscription is through the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC) rather than judicial review.
However, Palestine Action’s legal team pursued judicial review specifically because the Terrorism Act 2000 prohibits interim or suspensive relief during POAC appeal proceedings, which can take years to resolve. The High Court initially refused interim relief on 4 July, with both the High Court and Court of Appeal rejecting attempts to pause the ban before it came into effect.
Broader Implications for Protest Rights
Rights organisations including Amnesty International and Liberty submitted supporting statements to the court, warning about the precedent set by proscribing a direct action group engaged in property damage rather than violence against persons.
The decision also conflates protected expression and other conduct with acts of terrorism and so could readily lead to further chilling effect on the lawful exercise of these rights by many people,” Türk warned in his statement.
The proscription marks the first time in British history that authorities have attempted to criminalise direct action protest as terrorism. Palestine Action, founded in 2020, has focused its campaigns on companies involved in the Israeli arms trade, particularly Elbit Systems UK, which the group accuses of manufacturing weapons used in Gaza.
What Happens Next
Justice Chamberlain indicated he would deliver his decision on 30 July regarding whether to grant Ammori permission for a full judicial review. If successful, the substantive hearing could take place as early as September, potentially leading to the ban being quashed entirely.
The case has exposed deep divisions within government, with reports suggesting senior civil servants expressed concerns about the proposal within the Home Office. Labour peer Baroness Helena Kennedy KC, founding head of Keir Starmer’s own chambers at Doughty Street, described the move as “extraordinary” and “going down the old Trump road.
As the legal battle continues, the controversy has raised fundamental questions about the balance between national security and civil liberties in Britain, with critics warning that the precedent could be used to suppress legitimate protest movements in the future.
Follow for more updates on Britannia Daily
