Ruling against Palestine Action ban is embarrassing defeat for the government

"The list of those who criticised the ban on Palestine Action and its consequences was disparate to say the least, taking in a Trump administration official, a former director of public prosecutions, a former director of the security services, Home Office officials, politicians of different stripes, and UN experts, not to mention a host of NGOs. Now a trio of senior judges can be added to the list,"

"While serious property damage is a criterion for a ban under the Terrorism Act 2000, the legislation had previously only been used on groups intent on violence to the person, such as Islamic State and Boko Haram. As such, its use against Palestine Action, a group that targeted the UK sites of the Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems and others it said were complicit in genocide against the Palestinians, jarred with many."

A wide and varied range of figures and organisations criticised the decision to ban Palestine Action. Senior judges found the proscription disproportionate and impinging on freedom of speech because the group’s direct actions could be prosecuted under existing criminal law. The ban used the Terrorism Act 2000’s serious property damage criterion, previously applied to groups intent on violence to the person like Islamic State and Boko Haram, which made its use against a direct action group controversial. The move intensified perceptions that suppressing pro‑Palestinian voices was prioritised, with advocacy groups urging proscription and meetings with Elbit revealed.

Read at www.theguardian.com