Palestine Action has been granted permission by the Court of Appeal to proceed with a legal challenge against the Government’s decision to outlaw the group under anti-terror legislation. This move comes after the Home Office’s attempt to block the challenge was overturned in a significant ruling, setting the stage for a thorough review of the ban by a High Court judge next month.
The banning of Palestine Action on July 5 criminalized affiliation with or endorsement of the activist group, carrying a potential sentence of up to 14 years in prison. This categorization aligned Palestine Action with organizations like Islamic State and the neo-Nazi group National Action.
Since the ban came into effect, over 2,000 individuals have been apprehended for alleged support of Palestine Action, as reported by the advocacy group Defend Our Juries.
Huda Ammori, one of the group’s co-founders, initiated legal proceedings against the former Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror statutes. Despite government ministers’ efforts to impede the judicial review process, the Court dismissed their intervention, emphasizing that judicial review offered a swifter route for challenging the proscription compared to the deproscription application process.
In response to the Court of Appeal’s decision, Ms. Ammori hailed the ruling as a milestone victory against an extreme encroachment on civil liberties, underscoring the importance of holding government officials accountable for unlawful actions.
The judgment, delivered by Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr alongside Lord Justice Edis and Lord Justice Lewis, highlighted that the deproscription application and appeal process at POAC were designed for a different scenario.
The Home Office, in its statement, acknowledged the Court of Appeal’s ruling and expressed intent to carefully evaluate its implications. Noting Palestine Action’s actions involving criminal damage and alleged violence, the spokesperson affirmed that the group remains proscribed, with supporters facing legal consequences, emphasizing the distinction between backing Palestine and supporting a banned terrorist entity.