Palestine Action terror ban was lawful, Court of Appeal rules
The decision to ban Palestine Action as a terror group was lawful, the Court of Appeal has ruled.
Three judges at the High Court ruled in February that the then-home secretary Yvette Cooper’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 last year was unlawful, following a legal challenge from the group’s co-founder, Huda Ammori.
The ban, which began on July 5 last year, made membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, and has remained in force as the Home Office attempted to challenge the ruling.
At the Court of Appeal on Monday, five judges said the ban was a “justified and proportionate” interference on freedom of expression rights and overturned a ruling which was set to quash it.
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”.
Baroness 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”.
Baroness 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.”
Demonstrators protested outside of the Royal Courts of Justice in central London after the ruling, with the Metropolitan Police later saying that arrests were made.
Following the judgment, Ms Ammori said that she intended to take the case to the UK Supreme Court, and the European Court of Human Rights if needed.
She continued: “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.”
It is understood the Home Office will “robustly defend” a Supreme Court challenge.
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.”
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 Ms 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.
The Court of Appeal’s decision comes after four Palestine Action activists who mounted a “terrorist” raid on Israel-based defence firm Elbit Systems’ UK factory were jailed.
Charlotte Head, 30, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, 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.
Mr Justice Johnson gave the four prison sentences of between seven years and eight months and four years and eight months, with each defendant also spending an extra year on licence.
During the hearing 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.
Published: by Radio NewsHub