A British court has rejected an urgent request from Palestine Action to temporarily halt the UK government’s decision to ban the organisation under anti-terrorism laws. The campaign group, known for its direct action protests against companies and facilities linked to the arms trade with Israel, had hoped the ban would be paused while a full legal challenge is prepared later this month.
The co-founder of the group had appealed to the High Court, seeking an interim order to prevent the proscription from taking effect. However, both the High Court and the Court of Appeal dismissed the request late on Friday evening. The proscription officially comes into force at midnight, making it a criminal offence to be associated with or support the group, with a penalty of up to 14 years in prison.
The group has been targeted following a high-profile protest last month, where members reportedly entered a military site and defaced aircraft with red paint in protest of the UK’s involvement in the war on Gaza. This act drew sharp criticism from government officials and was cited as a trigger for the proscription process.
Opponents of the decision argue that it represents a serious threat to civil liberties and protest rights in the country. They warn that classifying a non-violent campaign group alongside internationally recognised terror organisations risks undermining public trust and freedom of expression.
One critic labelled the move a dangerous misuse of state power, claiming it sets a precedent for criminalising political dissent. Others called the move draconian and disproportionate, pointing out that existing laws already allow the prosecution of protest-related property damage without resorting to terrorism legislation.
Legal representatives for the group emphasised that the ban unfairly equates peaceful protest tactics with acts of extreme violence, calling it a distortion of the law designed to silence opposition. They argue that peaceful civil disobedience has a long and respected history in democratic societies, and targeting it with anti-terrorism laws is a deeply troubling escalation.
Protests erupted outside the Royal Courts of Justice as the legal hearings took place. Despite a heavy police presence, demonstrators vowed to continue resisting what they see as state repression and censorship.
The government has defended the move, insisting that while protest is a protected right, criminal damage and acts of intimidation have no place in lawful expression. Authorities argue that the group’s methods have crossed a line into illegality and that national security laws are appropriate in this case.
The group at the centre of the controversy has described its mission as a campaign to end UK complicity in what it calls Israel’s oppressive policies and actions in Palestine. Their strategy involves disrupting the arms trade and drawing attention to the UK’s role in supplying military equipment.
The ruling marks a significant moment in the UK’s domestic response to protests against its foreign policy stance on Gaza. It has triggered intense debate over the boundaries between protest and terrorism, and the future of political dissent in Britain.
