MPs like Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana will NOT be prosecuted for supporting terror group Palestine Action
Despite officially being branded a terrorist organisation, MPs like Jeremy Corbyn and Zarah Sultana will be able to openly back the group from the safety of the chamber.
And they will not face the same legal consequences that would apply to any ordinary Briton making similar comments in public or online, The Times reports.
The parliamentary loophole means that MPs can champion or even encourage Palestine Action, despite the fact that anyone else doing so outside Parliament could face up to 14 years behind bars.
It comes after a damning vote in the Commons saw MPs move to proscribe Palestine Action - placing it alongside terror groups including Hamas, al-Qaeda and Islamic State.
But 26 MPs voted against the move, including nine from Labour 's Left, such as Dianna Abbott, Clive Lewis and Richard Burgon - all of whom served under Jeremy Corbyn.
The ban was backed overwhelmingly by 385 votes to 26, with the House of Lords also giving its seal of approval.
A limp attempt by a Green peer to derail the decision failed miserably, rejected by 144 to 16.
But despite the crackdown, Commons officials confirmed that MPs who speak in support of Palestine Action during official proceedings - including debates, questions, or committees - cannot be prosecuted thanks to parliamentary privilege.
Parliamentary privilege is a centuries-old protection originally designed to safeguard democracy.
The controversy comes just days after two military planes were vandalised at RAF Brize Norton, with the damage – claimed by Palestine Action – running to a staggering £7 million.
Four suspects have since been charged by counter-terrorism police.
Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, and Jony Cink, 24, both of no fixed abode, along with the north London duo of Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, of Barnet, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22, of Cricklewood, appeared at Westminster magistrates' court.
The Crown Prosecution Service said it submitted 'that these offences have a terrorist connection'.
The defendants, who held hands and smiled as they entered the dock, spoke only to confirm their names. They also made peace signs, blew kisses and waved at supporters in the public gallery.
Yet, under House Rules, any MP can still praise the group's actions without fear, as long as they do so within the parliamentary estate.
Guidance for MPs states: 'This allows you to speak up on behalf of constituents, express an opinion, or condemn corruption, malpractice or even criminal activity without fear of legal action, as long as you do so in proceedings of the House.
'This protection extends to written proceedings: for example, written and oral questions, motions, early day motions, and amendments tabled to bills and motions.
'Anyone giving evidence to a committee of the House also has this protection, which is a safeguard for witnesses and also ensures that select committees are not obstructed in their inquiries by threats of legal action, or any other kind of threat against witnesses.'
Lord Hanson, a minister at the Home Office, defended the move to remove Palestine Action's 'veil of legitimacy'.
He said: 'I will always defend the right of British people to engage in legitimate and peaceful protest and to stand up for the causes in which they believe.
'But essential as these rights are, they do not provide a blank cheque for this particular group to seriously damage property or subject members of the public to fear and violence.
'We would not tolerate this activity from organisations if they were motivated by Islamist or extreme Right-wing ideology, and therefore I cannot tolerate it from Palestine Action.
'By implementing this measure, we will remove Palestine Action's veil of legitimacy, tackle its financial support, degrade its efforts to recruit and radicalise people into committing terrorist activity in its name.'
But predictably, Jeremy Corbyn hit back, claiming the move would have a 'chilling effect' on protest.
'Surely we should be looking at the issue that Palestine Action are concerned about, and the supply of weapons from this country to Israel, which has made all this possible. If this order goes through it will have a chilling effect on protests,' he said.
Critics argue that MPs should not be allowed to hide behind privilege when speaking in support of groups associated with criminal damage and intimidation.
But unless rules are changed, those very same MPs can continue to air their views without consequence, while members of the public could be jailed for saying far less.
It comes after p ro-Palestine MP Zarah Sultana announced she has quit Labour to join forces with Jeremy Corbyn in creating a new left-wing party.
Former opposition leader Corbyn claimed yesterday there was a 'thirst' among voters 'for an alternative view to be put' forward - and did not rule out leading it at the age of 76.
He has now been boosted by the arrival of Sultana, who has sat in the Commons as an independent MP since she had the Labour whip withdrawn last year.
In response to the Sultana's shock move, Corbyn's former shadow chancellor John McDonnell said: 'The people running Labour at the moment need to ask themselves why a young, articulate, talented, extremely dedicated socialist feels she now has no home in the Labour Party and has to leave.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ITV News
12 minutes ago
- ITV News
Palestine Action loses legal challenge to block terror ban
Palestine Action is set to be banned after a High Court judge refused a bid to temporarily block it from being designated as a terror group. Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, asked the High Court to temporarily block the government from banning the group as a terrorist organisation before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. The move is set to come into force at midnight after a High Court judge refused Ms Ammori's bid for a temporary block. Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Lawyers for Ms Ammori were also refused permission to appeal and were told to go to the Court of Appeal itself. The proposal was approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords earlier this week and would make membership and support for the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Some 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida and National Action. At a hearing on Friday, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, asked the court to suspend the 'ill-considered' and 'authoritarian abuse of statutory power' until a hearing due around July 21. Mr Husain told the London court: 'This is the first time in our history that a direct action civil disobedience group, which does not advocate for violence, has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists.' The barrister said that his client had been 'inspired' by a long history of direct action in the UK, 'from the suffragettes, to anti-apartheid activists, to Iraq war activists'. The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the High Court there was an 'insuperable hurdle' in the bid to temporarily block the ban of Palestine Action. The barrister also said that if a temporary block was granted, it would be a 'serious disfigurement of the statutory regime'. He said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Friday's hearing comes after an estimated £7 million worth of damage was caused to two Voyager planes at RAF Brize Norton on June 20, in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Four people were charged in connection with the incident.
The Herald Scotland
13 minutes ago
- The Herald Scotland
High Court judge refuses to temporarily block Palestine Action terror ban
The move is set to come into force at midnight after a High Court judge refused Ms Ammori's bid for a temporary block. Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Lawyers for Ms Ammori were also refused permission to appeal and were told to go to the Court of Appeal itself. Shortly after the decision was handed down, Ms Ammori said that she would be 'seeking an urgent appeal to try to prevent a dystopian nightmare of the Government's making'. She added: 'The Home Secretary is rushing through the implementation of the proscription at midnight tonight despite the fact that our legal challenge is ongoing and that she has been completely unclear about how it will be enforced, leaving the public in the dark about their rights to free speech and expression after midnight tonight when this proscription comes into effect. 'Hundreds of thousands of people across the country have expressed support for Palestine Action by joining our mailing list, following and sharing our social media content and signing petitions, and many, including iconic figures like Sally Rooney, say they will continue to declare 'we are all Palestine Action' and speak out against this preposterous proscription, demonstrating how utterly unworkable it will be.' In a 26-page judgment, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that 'some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated'. He continued: 'It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of Palestine Action prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel's genocide and other serious violations of international law. 'They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.' He added: 'That said, there is no doubt that there will be serious consequences if the order comes into effect immediately and interim relief is refused.' The proposal was approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords earlier this week and would make membership and support for the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Some 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida and National Action. Protesters gathered outside the central London court on Friday (Lucy North/PA) At a hearing on Friday, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, asked the court to suspend the 'ill-considered' and 'authoritarian abuse of statutory power' until a hearing due around July 21. Mr Husain told the London court: 'This is the first time in our history that a direct action civil disobedience group, which does not advocate for violence, has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists.' The barrister said that his client had been 'inspired' by a long history of direct action in the UK, 'from the suffragettes, to anti-apartheid activists, to Iraq war activists'. The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that there was no 'express provision' to protect lawyers representing her in the potential legal challenge from criminal consequences if the ban came into effect. She also said that if the ban came into effect the harm would be 'far-reaching', could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh later named Normal People author Sally Rooney, who lives abroad and 'fears the ramifications for her, for her work, for her books, for her programmes' if she shows support for Palestine Action. 'Is the Prime Minister going to denounce her, an Irish artist, as a supporter of a proscribed organisation?' 'Will that have ramifications for her with the BBC, etc?' Ms Ni Ghralaigh asked. A further hearing is expected later in July (Lucy North/PA) Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the High Court there was an 'insuperable hurdle' in the bid to temporarily block the ban of Palestine Action. The barrister also said that if a temporary block was granted, it would be a 'serious disfigurement of the statutory regime'. He said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Friday's hearing comes after an estimated £7 million worth of damage was caused to two Voyager planes at RAF Brize Norton on June 20, in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Four people were charged in connection with the incident.
Rhyl Journal
19 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
High Court judge refuses to temporarily block Palestine Action terror ban
Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, asked the High Court to temporarily block the Government from banning the group as a terrorist organisation before a potential legal challenge against the decision to proscribe it under the Terrorism Act 2000. The move is set to come into force at midnight after a High Court judge refused Ms Ammori's bid for a temporary block. Mr Justice Chamberlain said: 'I have concluded that the harm which would ensue if interim relief is refused but the claim later succeeds is insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force.' Lawyers for Ms Ammori were also refused permission to appeal and were told to go to the Court of Appeal itself. Shortly after the decision was handed down, Ms Ammori said that she would be 'seeking an urgent appeal to try to prevent a dystopian nightmare of the Government's making'. She added: 'The Home Secretary is rushing through the implementation of the proscription at midnight tonight despite the fact that our legal challenge is ongoing and that she has been completely unclear about how it will be enforced, leaving the public in the dark about their rights to free speech and expression after midnight tonight when this proscription comes into effect. 'Hundreds of thousands of people across the country have expressed support for Palestine Action by joining our mailing list, following and sharing our social media content and signing petitions, and many, including iconic figures like Sally Rooney, say they will continue to declare 'we are all Palestine Action' and speak out against this preposterous proscription, demonstrating how utterly unworkable it will be.' In a 26-page judgment, Mr Justice Chamberlain said that 'some of the consequences feared by the claimant and others who have given evidence are overstated'. He continued: 'It will remain lawful for the claimant and other persons who were members of Palestine Action prior to proscription to continue to express their opposition to Israel's actions in Gaza and elsewhere, including by drawing attention to what they regard as Israel's genocide and other serious violations of international law. 'They will remain legally entitled to do so in private conversations, in print, on social media and at protests.' He added: 'That said, there is no doubt that there will be serious consequences if the order comes into effect immediately and interim relief is refused.' The proposal was approved by both the House of Commons and the House of Lords earlier this week and would make membership and support for the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Some 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida and National Action. At a hearing on Friday, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, asked the court to suspend the 'ill-considered' and 'authoritarian abuse of statutory power' until a hearing due around July 21. Mr Husain told the London court: 'This is the first time in our history that a direct action civil disobedience group, which does not advocate for violence, has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists.' The barrister said that his client had been 'inspired' by a long history of direct action in the UK, 'from the suffragettes, to anti-apartheid activists, to Iraq war activists'. The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that there was no 'express provision' to protect lawyers representing her in the potential legal challenge from criminal consequences if the ban came into effect. She also said that if the ban came into effect the harm would be 'far-reaching', could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ms Ni Ghralaigh later named Normal People author Sally Rooney, who lives abroad and 'fears the ramifications for her, for her work, for her books, for her programmes' if she shows support for Palestine Action. 'Is the Prime Minister going to denounce her, an Irish artist, as a supporter of a proscribed organisation?' 'Will that have ramifications for her with the BBC, etc?' Ms Ni Ghralaigh asked. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, told the High Court there was an 'insuperable hurdle' in the bid to temporarily block the ban of Palestine Action. The barrister also said that if a temporary block was granted, it would be a 'serious disfigurement of the statutory regime'. He said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Friday's hearing comes after an estimated £7 million worth of damage was caused to two Voyager planes at RAF Brize Norton on June 20, in an action claimed by Palestine Action. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes was 'disgraceful' and that the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Four people were charged in connection with the incident.
