Decision due on whether Palestine Action legal challenge can go ahead
The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Earlier this month, lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to allow her to bring a High Court challenge over the ban, describing it as an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression.
Mr Justice Chamberlain will give his decision on whether the legal action can proceed on Wednesday.
Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, told the court at the hearing on July 21 that the ban had made the UK 'an international outlier' and was 'repugnant'.
Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.'
The Home Office is defending the legal action.
Sir James Eadie KC, for the department, said in written submissions that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was 'squarely' within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription.
He said: 'There is no credible basis on which it can be asserted that the purpose of this activity is not designed to influence the Government, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.'
Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, saying that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'.
The bid for a full High Court challenge comes after Ms Ammori failed in a previous bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, and the Court of Appeal dismissed a challenge over that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Seventh suspect arrested over RAF Brize Norton break in after vandals caused £7m worth of damage to two military aircraft
A seventh suspect has been arrested over a break-in at RAF Brize Norton during which two military aircraft were damaged. The 22-year-old man was detained on Friday in Bedford on suspicion of the commission, preparation or instigation of acts of terrorism. The incident saw activists break into the Oxfordshire air base and spray paint on two RAF Voyager planes, causing £7million worth of damage. Palestine Action, which has since been proscribed under terrorism legislation, said it was behind the incident. Last month, four people were charged and remanded in custody over the break-in in June. A 41-year-old woman was released on bail, while a man was freed without charge. Footage from the incident showed two people inside the base at night. One could be seen riding a scooter up to a Voyager and spraying paint into its jet engine. Palestine Action also said activists had used crowbars to damage planes. The Government moved to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws after the group claimed responsibility for the action. Some 81 organisations have been proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas and al Qaida, far-right groups such as National Action, and Russian private military company Wagner Group. Another 14 organisations connected with Northern Ireland are also banned under previous legislation, including the IRA and UDA.
Times
4 hours ago
- Times
British Army will tell Kenyan children their soldier fathers' names
The names and addresses of 11 British soldiers will be handed over to the children they are suspected of fathering while stationed on a base in Kenya. In an unprecedented legal case defence officials, as well as those from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and HM Revenue & Customs, have been told to disclose the last known contact details for the men by a High Court judge. The oldest child in the case was born in the 1990s, the youngest is still an infant. While the initial ruling covers the cases of only 11 children, lawyers believe there could be hundreds more who have been fathered by British soldiers posted in Kenya. Some may not know that they have children. The children are also seeking to bring legal action to have the fathers named as their legal parents, which will be ruled on at a later date. If granted, the decision could mean the children are entitled to British citizenship, as well as inheritance rights and child maintenance payments.
The Guardian
12 hours ago
- The Guardian
Palestine Action ban coupled with Online Safety Act ‘a threat to public debate'
The Online Safety Act together with the proscription of Palestine Action could result in platforms censoring Palestinian-related content, human rights organisations have warned. Open Rights Group, Index on Censorship and others have written to Ofcom calling on it to provide clear guidance to platforms on distinguishing lawful expression from content deemed to be in support of terrorism. They say failure to act by the regulator act risks misidentification – including through algorithms – of support for Palestine as support for Palestine Action, which on 5 July became the first direct action protest group to be banned under UK anti-terrorism laws. It also runs the risk of misidentifying objections to Palestine Action's proscription as unlawful support for the group, the signatories claim. Sara Chitseko, a pre-crime programme manager at Open Rights Group, said: 'Crucial public debate about Gaza is being threatened by vague, overly broad laws that could lead to content about Palestine being removed or hidden online. There's also a real danger that people will start self-censoring, worried they might be breaking the law just by sharing or liking posts related to Palestine and non-violent direct action. 'This is a serious attack on freedom of expression and the right to protest in the UK. We need to ensure that people can share content about Palestine online with being afraid that they will be characterised as supportive of terrorism.' The organisations' concerns are exacerbated by Ofcom's advice that platforms can avoid worrying about their duties under the Online Safety Act (OSA) if they ensure they are more censorious than the act requires. 'This approach risks encouraging automated moderation that disproportionately affects political speech, particularly from marginalised communities, including Palestinian voices,' the letter says. Unlike in the EU, there is no independent mechanism for people in the UK to challenge content they feel has been wrongly taken down. The signatories want platforms – the letter has also been sent to Meta, Alphabet, X and ByteDance – to commit to an independent dispute mechanism, if evidence emerges of lawful speech being suppressed. The letter, also signed by Electronic Frontier Foundation in the US and organisations from eight European countries, as well as experts and academics, says: 'We are concerned that the proscription of Palestine Action may result in an escalation of platforms removing content, using algorithms to hide Palestine solidarity posts and leave individuals and those reporting on events vulnerable to surveillance or even criminalisation for simply sharing or liking content that references non-violent direct action. 'We are also concerned about what platforms understand by their legal duties regarding expressions of 'support' for Palestine Action.' The letter comes a week after the OSA's age-gating for 'adult' material came into effect, prompting fears about access to Palestine-related content. For example, Reddit users in the UK have to verify their age to access the Reddit sub r/israelexposed. Ella Jakubowska, the head of policy at EDRi in Brussels, said there would inevitably be suppression of 'critical voices, journalism and social movements around the world. The problem is worsened by automated content moderation systems, well known for over-removing content from Palestinian creators, in support of Black Lives Matter, about LGBTQI+ issues and more. 'It is very likely that in trying to comply with these requirements, platforms would unjustly remove content from people in the EU and other regions.' She said that would contravene laws such as the EU Digital Services Act, designed to strike a balance between keeping people safe online and freedom of expression. An Ofcom spokesperson said: 'We have provided detailed guidance to platforms about how to identify the particular types of illegal and harmful material prohibited or restricted by the act, including how to determine whether content may have been posted by a proscribed organisation. 'There is no requirement on companies to restrict legal content for adult users. In fact, they must carefully consider how they protect users' rights to freedom of expression while keeping people safe.' Meta, Alphabet, X and ByteDance were all approached for comment.
