UK High Court Rules Palestine Action Terrorist Ban Unlawful
The UK High Court has ruled that the government's decision to ban the activist group Palestine Action as a terrorist organization was unlawful. The ruling, issued on Friday, found the proscription by then-Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to be disproportionate and discriminatory, significantly interfering with rights to freedom of speech and assembly. Despite the ruling, the ban remains in effect as the government has confirmed its intention to appeal the judgment.
The High Court found the proscription by the Home Secretary "disproportionate and discriminatory, significantly interfering with rights to freedom of speech and assembly."
High Court Decision and Rationale
A panel of judges, including Victoria Sharp, Jonathan Swift, and Karen Steyn, determined that the "nature and scale of Palestine Action's activities" did not meet the necessary criteria for proscription under terror legislation.
Justice Sharp's 46-page judgment stated that while a "very small number" of the group's actions met the definition of terrorism and the group promotes its cause through criminality, existing criminal law is sufficient to prosecute those involved, rendering proscription unnecessary and disproportionate. The court also concluded that the decision to proscribe the group was discriminatory.
Government and Group Responses
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood expressed disappointment with the court's decision, disagreeing with the assessment of disproportionality, and confirmed the government's intent to appeal to the Court of Appeal. Government lawyers had previously maintained that the proscription was a necessary measure for national security.
Huda Ammori, a co-founder of Palestine Action who initiated the legal challenge, described the ruling as a victory for fundamental freedoms in Britain and the struggle for Palestinian freedom. Supporters gathered outside London's High Court expressed satisfaction with the outcome.
"The ruling is a victory for fundamental freedoms in Britain and the struggle for Palestinian freedom."
— Huda Ammori, Palestine Action co-founder
Background on Palestine Action and the Ban
Palestine Action is a UK-based organization established in 2020 by Huda Ammori and climate activist Richard Barnard. The group states its mission as "ending global participation in Israel’s genocidal and apartheid regime" and aims to disrupt the operations of weapons manufacturers with connections to the Israeli government. Its actions have included occupying, blockading, spray-painting, and disrupting companies such as UAV Tactical Systems, Leonardo, and Elbit Systems UK facilities. Specific actions have included slashing and spray-painting a portrait of former Foreign Secretary Arthur Balfour.
The proscription of Palestine Action by the Home Office in July 2025 followed an incident in late June 2025 at the RAF Brize Norton air base, where activists vandalized two Airbus Voyager refueling planes. The ban designated the group alongside organizations like al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Hamas, making membership or support a criminal offense punishable by up to 14 years in prison. This designation drew condemnation from UN experts, human rights groups, and politicians. Officials assert that the group's actions have caused millions of pounds in damage and impacted national security.
Impact of the Ban and Legal Implications
Since the ban was implemented, nearly 3,000 individuals have been arrested for activities such as holding signs in support of Palestine Action. These arrests included various demographics, such as elderly people, priests, former magistrates, and retired doctors. Home Office statistics from December revealed a 660% increase in terrorism arrests in the year ending September 2025, with 86% linked to Palestine Action. The average age of those linked to the group was 57, compared to 30 for other terrorism-related arrests. A Freedom of Information request indicated the Home Office has spent approximately £700,000 (around $952,000) on the case.
Human rights activists and civil liberties organizations had argued that the ban constituted an overreach of governmental authority, potentially criminalizing political dissent and infringing upon free speech and the right to protest.
London's Metropolitan Police acknowledged potential public confusion due to the government's appeal. They stated that officers would no longer make arrests specifically for Palestine Action support, but would continue to focus on evidence gathering. Barrister Audrey Cherryl Mogan noted that quashing the ban will not immediately affect ongoing criminal cases involving Palestine Action-linked activists. For instance, Zoe Rogers and five co-defendants were acquitted of aggravated burglary charges related to an alleged raid on an Israeli arms factory, though the Crown Prosecution Service plans to seek a retrial on criminal damage and violent disorder charges.
The ruling, which followed a three-day judicial review held in December, brings focus to the application of Britain's counter-terrorism laws to domestic protest activities and the extent of executive power. It occurs amid other related events, including a hunger strike, the government's decision not to award a £2 billion defense contract to Elbit Systems UK, and the acquittal of activists charged in connection with a break-in at an Elbit Systems UK factory.