The UK government is attempting to prevent Huda Ammori,
co-founder of Palestine Action, from legally challenging the group's
designation as a terrorist organisation under anti-terrorism laws. The group
was banned in July following its direct actions against Israel-linked companies
and a raid on a military airbase.
UK Government Moves to Block Legal Challenge
The British government has sought to block a legal challenge
brought by Huda Ammori, co-founder of the pro-Palestinian campaign group
Palestine Action, against the group's proscription as a terrorist organisation
under the UK's Terrorism Act 2000. As reported by Sam Tobin of Reuters, the
government is asking the Court of Appeal to overturn a High Court decision that
granted Ammori permission to challenge the ban, arguing that any legal
challenge should be handled by a specialist tribunal, not the High Court.
Background on Palestine Action's Activities
Palestine Action, formed in 2020 with Huda Ammori as one of
its founders, has campaigned mainly by targeting companies in Britain
associated with Israel, including acts such as spraying red paint, blocking
entrances, and damaging equipment. The group accuses the UK government of
complicity in Israeli war crimes in Gaza. Their campaign notably focuses on
Israeli defence contractor Elbit Systems and various Israel-linked companies.
The proscription came shortly after members of Palestine
Action forcibly entered the RAF Brize Norton airbase in June, damaging two
military aircraft. Four members have been charged in connection with that
incident. According to multiple reports including Reuters and the BBC, the UK
government cited this raid and ongoing disruptive actions at Elbit Systems
facilities as justification for designating the group as terrorist.
Legal and Judicial Proceedings
The group was made illegal from 5 July 2025, and membership
carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment. Since then, more than 1,000
people have been arrested for publicly supporting the group or participating in
demonstrations.
As reported by the BBC on 30 July 2025, the High Court ruled
that Palestine Action has the right to contest the ban, considering arguments
that the proscription may disproportionately infringe on rights to freedom of
expression and peaceful assembly under the European Convention on Human Rights.
The court highlighted concerns about the Home Secretary’s decision-making
process, including the lack of prior consultation with Palestine Action before
imposing the ban.
The High Court declined to suspend the ban pending full
judicial review, which is scheduled to take place over three days in November
2025. The ruling also stressed potential legal confusion and disorder if the
ban's legality were not clarified promptly due to varied criminal prosecutions
across courts.
The Home Office has appealed this decision, maintaining that
a specialist tribunal should adjudicate challenges to proscription orders
rather than the High Court, emphasizing the need for a streamlined legal
process for terrorism designations.
Government and Police Perspectives
Official UK government discussions revealed that ministers
and officials deliberated on banning Palestine Action for at least eight
months. The decision was driven by concerns over serious criminal damage caused
by the group, including an estimated £7 million damage to military aircraft at
RAF Brize Norton.
Police leaders conveyed to the Home Office that conventional
criminal law was insufficient to address the group's high-level offences, which
met the legal definition of terrorism due to their serious damage and intent.
They argued that banning the group would serve as a deterrent while
acknowledging risks of the ban being perceived as state repression.
The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO)
warned such a ban could be seen by some international partners as a stance
against antisemitism but also might provoke backlash, perceived as suppressing
Palestinian activism and risking tensions within the UK’s Muslim and Jewish
communities.
Human Rights Concerns
The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights expressed
significant concern about the UK’s use of counter-terrorism laws to ban
Palestine Action. Volker Türk, the UN Human Rights Chief, described the
decision as a "disturbing misuse" of anti-terrorism legislation that
could hinder legitimate exercise of freedoms.
Türk emphasized that the UK’s broad definition of terrorism
in domestic law extends to property damage, but international standards
narrowly define terrorist acts as involving intent to cause death or serious
injury to intimidate or coerce a population or government. He warned that
conflating peaceful protest with terrorism risks chilling free speech and
assembly.
Since the ban took effect, at least 200 individuals have
been arrested under the Terrorism Act for peaceful protests supporting Palestine
Action, raising alarms about disproportionate enforcement.
Türk called on the UK government to rescind the ban on Palestine Action, halt prosecutions of protesters, and revise its terrorism legislation to align with international human rights norms.
The UK government has designated Palestine Action as a
terrorist organisation due to its direct actions targeting Israeli-linked
companies and an airbase, leading to criminal charges and arrests under
anti-terrorism laws. The group's co-founder is legally challenging this
proscription on grounds of disproportionate infringement of free speech and
assembly rights.
The Home Office is pushing to have the challenge heard by a specialist tribunal rather than the High Court, while human rights bodies and international observers have raised concerns over overreach of counter-terrorism laws and potential suppression of legitimate protest.