Palestine Action’s ban under terrorism legislation has been ruled unlawful by the High Court in a humiliating blow for the government but the ban will remain in place until a further order by the courts.
Huda Ammori, co-founder of the group, took the Home Office to court over the decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terrorism laws, with her lawyers saying that the move was unprecedented.
Since the proscription last July, thousands of people have been arrested for holding up placards in support of Palestine Action. Hundreds of trials are expected throughout this year and into the next for those accused of taking part in protests, but they face being upended by the High Court’s ruling.
Justice Victoria Sharp told the High Court on Friday that the proscription of Palestine Action “did result in a very significant interference with the right to freedom of speech and the right to freedom of assembly”.
She added that “the proscription of Palestine Action was disproportionate”, saying only a very small number of Palestine Action’s activities amounted to terrorism. She said that the group’s acts “had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence to warrant proscription.”
Dame Victoria Sharp, Mr Justice Swift and Mrs Justice Steyn have decided that the terror ban will remain in force until further legal hearings can take place.
Lawyers for Ms Ammori and the Home Office have till the 20 February to provide further submissions to the court ahead of more hearings that will decide whether the ban should be lifted.
Then-home secretary Yvette Cooper took the decision to ban the group under terror laws after activists broke into an RAF base and damaged two military aircraft. Human rights groups have condemned the move as a “grave abuse of state power” and UN high commissioner Volker Turk called the ban “disproportionate and unnecessary”.
During the court case, Ms Ammori’s lawyers insisted that Palestine Action does not advocate for violence, saying any examples of serious violence against property or person “are not the norm, they are rare”.
Ms Ammori argued that the impact of the proscription was “dramatic, severe, widespread and potentially lifelong”.
Home secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was “disappointed” by the High Court’s ruling, adding: “I intend to fight this judgement in the Court of Appeal”.
The Independent revealed yesterday that the Home Office have spent £700,000 in legal fees fighting Ms Ammori’s case.
This is a breaking story. More to follow..
