In a significant setback for the government, the High Court has ruled that the classification of Palestine Action as a terror organization is unlawful. This decision challenges the previous categorization that placed the protest group in the same league as extremist entities like Islamic State.

The ruling, delivered by a panel of three senior judges, criticized the ban as being disproportionate. Despite the verdict, the ban remains active as Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood prepares to appeal the decision. However, the judgment has already influenced the Metropolitan Police’s approach to handling supporters of Palestine Action.

In response, the police force has halted the arrests of individuals supporting the group. Instead, they will now focus on collecting evidence from those displaying signs or placards declaring support for Palestine Action, rather than detaining them on the spot.

A police spokesperson commented, “Officers will continue to identify instances where support for Palestine Action is being shown. However, they will prioritize gathering evidence related to these activities and the individuals involved, allowing for enforcement measures to be taken at a later stage rather than immediate arrests.”

This approach, as stated by the spokesperson, strives to balance the court’s decision with the ongoing legal proceedings, reflecting a more measured response to the situation.

‘This is the most proportionate approach we can take, acknowledging the decision reached by the court while recognising that proceedings are not yet fully concluded.’

The High Court’s ruling means that more than 2,000 people who were arrested for holding signs or displaying messages supporting the group may now have proceedings dropped.

Palestine Action was proscribed on July 5 last year by former Home Secretary Yvette Cooper after a number of high-profile violent protests, including a raid on a UK-based defence company that makes weapons for Israel.

As a result, being a member of, or showing support for, the group became an offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. 

A crowd gathered outside the High Court building in central London cheering and chanting ‘Free Palestine’ as the decision was announced, while its founder Huda Ammori hailed a ‘monumental victory’ for ‘fundamental freedoms’. 

However, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council said they were ‘deeply concerned’ by the ruling.

Palestine Action co-founders Richard Barnard (left) and Huda Ammori (right) won their appeal against their group’s proscription

Supporters of the group celebrated the decision outside the High Court in London

Some held signs saying ‘Up Yours Cooper’, a reference to former Home Secretary Yvette Cooper who implemented the ban on Palestine Action

Protesters outside the High Court

The three judges, led by Dame Victoria Sharp, said in their judgment that banning the group was an ‘very significant’ interference with its members’ right to protest under Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

They said the Home Secretary had wrongly applied her own policy when deciding to proscribe the group.

Under that policy, she should have considered the specific threat the organisation posed to the UK, but instead relied on the additional ‘advantage’ that proscription would give police extra powers to disrupt the group.

In an obvious rebuke to the Home Secretary, the judges went further and ruled that proscribing Palestine Action was ‘disproportionate’.

‘At its core, Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and encouragement of criminality,’ they said. ‘A very small number of its actions have amounted to terrorist action. 

‘For those actions, regardless of proscription, the criminal law is available to prosecute those concerned. If those involved are convicted they face the prospect of significant punishment, which would serve as a significant deterrent to others.’

However, the judges added: ‘The claimant…has sought to portray Palestine Action as a ‘non-violent’ organisation. This is not a sustainable proposition.’ 

The court previously heard Palestine Action had an ‘Underground Manual’, which provided members with guidance on how to cause the maximum amount of disruption.

The judges said: ‘It contains an unmistakable invitation to individuals to group together to commit acts of criminal damage. This is not limited to symbolic acts.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was disappointed with the court’s decision and plans to appeal it

One protester dressed as the grim reaper outside the court where judges ruled proscribing Palestine Action was unlawful

Supporters of Palestine Action gathered at the High Court

‘Palestine Action encourages those who read the Underground Manual to ‘be creative’ and to ‘disrupt damage or destroy’ targets without restraint.’

Despite their ruling, the ban will remain in place to allow the Government time to consider an appeal.

Home Secretary Ms Mahmood immediately announced her decision to fight back, saying: ‘I am disappointed by the court’s decision and disagree with the notion that banning this terrorist organisation is disproportionate.

‘The proscription of Palestine Action followed a rigorous and evidence-based decision-making process, endorsed by Parliament. The proscription does not prevent peaceful protest in support of the Palestinian cause, another point on which the Court agrees.

‘Home Secretaries must retain the ability to take action to protect our national security and keep the public safe. I intend to fight this judgment in the Court of Appeal.’

During a judicial review hearing in November, Ms Ammori argued that the ban was a disproportionate interference with free speech and protest rights.

She claimed the group had engaged in an ‘honourable tradition’ of direct action and civil disobedience.

The Home Office said proscribing the group had the intended effect of disrupting its ‘pattern of escalatory conduct’ and had ‘not prevented people from protesting in favour of the Palestinian people or against Israel’s actions in Gaza’.

A spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: ‘We recognise these are unusual circumstances and there will likely be some confusion among the public as to what happens next.

‘From a Metropolitan Police perspective, officers will continue to identify offences where support for Palestine Action is being expressed, but they will focus on gathering evidence of those offences and the people involved to provide opportunities for enforcement at a later date, rather than making arrests at the time.

‘This is the most proportionate approach we can take, acknowledging the decision reached by the court while recognising that proceedings are not yet fully concluded.’

Tom Southerden, of Amnesty International, hailed the ruling as a ‘vital affirmation of the right to protest at a time when it has been under sustained and deliberate attack’.

‘The High Court’s decision sends a clear message: the Government cannot simply reach for sweeping counter‑terrorism powers to silence critics or suppress dissent,’ he said.

Lord Walney, the government’s former adviser on political violence, said the decision was ‘deeply disappointing’ and ‘risks sending a signal that far left activists can hold the country to ransom’.

‘While Palestine Action has deployed violence less frequently than other proscribed groups, the criminal damage they systematically inflict clearly falls within the legal definition of terrorism,’ he said.

‘However, this fiasco could be fixed if ministers accept and fast track my amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill currently in the Lords, that would allow groups dedicated to criminal sabotage to be banned without labelling them as terrorists.’