Britain26 November, 20252 min read
UK Government Faces High Court Judicial Review Over Ban On Palestine Action Under Terrorism Act
This article is an automated aggregation of coverage from news outlets. Our editorials offer in-depth analysis curated by the NewsCord team.
UK government proscribed Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act as a terrorist organisation. Huda Ammori, Palestine Action cofounder, launched a High Court judicial review.
7 outlets told this the same way.
Palestine Action proscription review
UK judges began a three-day judicial review in London to consider the government’s decision to proscribe the direct-action group Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act. Police made arrests among demonstrators outside the Royal Courts of Justice as the hearing opened, and reports describe large demonstrations and arrests of people holding pro-Palestine signs. The case brings into focus Palestine Action’s legal status and the consequences of proscription for activists and supporters, and the long-awaited hearing follows the government’s July decision to list the group under terrorism legislation and a legal challenge by co-founder Huda Ammori that has drawn mass public attention.
“UK judges are reviewing the government’s decision to proscribe the activist group Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act.”
Court review and protests
Outside and inside court the review has been accompanied by contentious scenes and questions about judicial impartiality. Multiple outlets describe demonstrators being detained or "going floppy" during arrests and note that arrests continued as people displayed pro-Palestine placards.
Some reports document specific incidents, such as a detained pensioner. Separately, coverage highlights controversy over the composition of the judicial panel after the removal of one judge and activist claims of links between replacement judges and the arms industry, which campaigners say raises impartiality concerns.
Proscription legal dispute
At the heart of the judicial review are competing legal narratives. Lawyers for Huda Ammori and Palestine Action say the proscription unlawfully chills legitimate protest and is disproportionate because government assessments found the group does not advocate for violence.
“The hearing is before a three-judge panel the article describes as ‘Israel supporters,’ noting family links to the arms trade and that one judge previously allowed continued UK supply of spares for Israeli strike aircraft.”
The Home Office and the government maintain the ban is necessary and proportionate, arguing that property damage intended to influence or intimidate can meet the terrorism threshold. The government has also cited instances of escalating criminal damage, including a reported break-in at RAF Brize Norton that authorities say caused significant financial loss, to justify proscription.
Judicial review of protest ban
Observers and campaign groups warn the case could have wide implications for protest rights and the policing of dissent in the UK. Coverage records that, since the ban was imposed, hundreds to thousands of people have been arrested for supporting Palestine Action, and civil‑liberties organisations as well as international bodies have criticised the ban as disproportionate. If the judicial review overturns the decision it could lift the ban and reduce the criminalisation risk for activists; if the ban is upheld, campaigners say it will have a chilling effect on a range of pro‑Palestinian and direct‑action tactics.