Palestine Action triumphs in London court as it contests terror ban
High Court Opens Door for Free Speech Challenge
The recent ruling by Judge Martin Chamberlain has breathed new life into the legal fight against the UK government’s ban on the pro‑Palestinian group Palestine Action. Co‑founder Huda Ammori has requested a full High Court objection, arguing that the proscription violates her fundamental rights of freedom of expression and assembly.
Background of the Ban
- The ban was enacted on 5 July after activists infiltrated a southern England air force base.
- Prosecutors claim the group caused significant damage, estimated at £7 million ($9.3 million), to two aircraft.
- Membership or support is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Judge’s Reasonable Arguments
Judge Chamberlain’s decision highlights two key points that are “reasonably arguable”:
- 1. The ban constitutes a disproportionate interference with Ammori’s right to free speech and assembly.
- 2. The government breached natural justice by failing to consult the group prior to enacting the ban.
Public Reaction and Law Enforcement
Since the ban came into force, authorities have arrested more than 100 individuals across London and other cities for expressing support to Palestine Action. Police have warned that any public endorsement of the group is now a criminal offence, after a final High Court challenge failed to halt the legal proscription.
Summary
The court’s ruling signals that the legal battle for free expression is far from over. The possibility remains that a broader High Court challenge will ultimately restore Palestine Action’s rights to assembly and speech, pressuring the government to reconsider its stringent ban.
