Palestine Action vows to go to European human rights court if UK government upholds ban

Palestine Action will take the UK government to the European court of human rights (ECtHR) should the supreme court uphold a ban on its existence, the group’s founder said. The group was designated a terrorist organisation by the UK government last year after a series of acts of sabotage, including causing damage to military planes at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire. Palestine Action claims the ban unduly interferes with the rights of the group and its supporters.

Lawyers acting on its behalf of made that case to the supreme court in Westminster during a two-day hearing last week. “I think the judges were very hostile,” said Huda Ammori, who co-founded the group in 2020, in an interview with The Observer , noting the number of times the group’s barristers were interrupted with questions from the bench. She vowed to file a case at the ECtHR, claiming the government had breached articles 10 and 11 of the European convention on human rights – which relate to freedom of expression, and of assembly and association – as well as article 14, which protects against discrimination.

She has argued that the ban disproportionately affects people of Palestinian ethnicity. Legal observers backed up the opinion that the court appeared broadly sceptical of Palestine Action’s arguments. The government defended the ban, citing multiple security assessments of an escalating campaign of sabotage and violence. Related articles: Huda Amorri: ‘It was beyond our comprehension that Palestine Action could become a terrorist organisation’ The UK may not be an AI superpower, but it can teach the world how to use it smartly Since the group was banned, about 4,000 people have been arrested , largely for engaging in non-violent actions such as holding up signs that express their support.

The case is most likely to hinge on whether the court believes the impact on these people outweighs the benefits of the ban. “I rather get the impression that the main focus which we’re asked to place on interference is with the people in the penumbra rather than the people at the centre,” said Michael Briggs, one of the supreme court justices, while questioning the government’s lawyers. Palestine Action’s legal team had tried to convince the court that “people might feel ‘chilled’ – dissuaded – from protesting not by the wording of the law but by how they see the police putting it into practice”, said David Mead, a human rights law professor at the University of East Anglia.

“We saw examples last year of police wrongly arresting people for wearing ‘Plasticine Action’ T-shirts or for simply carrying Palestine flags. This is all part of the claim that the ban is disproportionate.” Acting for the government, barrister James Eadie KC told the court that the effects on supporters were in proportion and “a sidewind of the judgment that parliament itself has made”. The court’s decision is expected in the coming months.

What are your thoughts on this? Email us at letters@observer.co.uk Photograph by Henry Nicholls / AFP/ Getty Images Justice Courts Human rights UK News National Protest Palestine Action