London's Met Police arrest dozens for alleged support for banned Palestine Action group during protest
The protest marked the second consecutive weekend of arrests over alleged references to the proscribed organization.
The demonstration was part of a coordinated campaign by the group Defend Our Juries, which held simultaneous actions in other UK cities including Manchester, Cardiff, and Derry.
Protesters gathered in Parliament Square shortly after 1 p.m., sitting silently at the base of statues of Nelson Mandela and Mahatma Gandhi while holding cardboard signs bearing messages in support of Palestine Action, The Guardian reported.
According to the Metropolitan Police, the arrests were made under terrorism legislation.
In a statement posted on social media, the force said: 'We are responding to a protest in support of Palestine Action. Officers are in the process of making arrests. We will issue any updates on this thread.'
In a follow-up statement, the Met confirmed: 'Officers have made 41 arrests for showing support for a proscribed organisation. One person has been arrested for common assault.'
Defend Our Juries said on X: 'Over 300 police officers have been seen to carry away dozens of people from the foot of statues of Nelson Mandela and Gandhi for alleged 'terrorism offences'. Those arrested are accused of holding signs in support of Palestine Action.'
Officers were seen cordoning off demonstrators, searching their bags, inspecting ID cards, and seizing signs. Some protesters lay atop one another as police moved in to confiscate their placards. The demonstrators' signs reportedly included messages such as: 'I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.'
The protest comes days after the UK government's controversial decision to ban Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act.
The move followed an incident in which activists allegedly broke into RAF Brize Norton and defaced two military aircraft with spray paint.
The ban was announced by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper in late June and formally approved by MPs last Wednesday.
The House of Lords backed the decision without a vote the following day. It marks the first time a direct action protest group has been proscribed under terrorism legislation in the UK, placing Palestine Action in the same legal category as Hamas, al-Qaeda, and Islamic State.
Under the new law, supporting or promoting the group now carries a prison sentence of up to 14 years.
Palestine Action is known for its campaigns targeting Israeli and Israeli-linked businesses in Britain, particularly defense firm Elbit Systems.
Its protests have included blocking entrances, damaging property, and spraying buildings with red paint to symbolise blood.
Critics of the ban say the government is conflating protest with terrorism and suppressing legitimate dissent.
In a failed legal challenge to the proscription, a lawyer for Palestine Action argued the government's move marked 'the first time Britain had proscribed a group which undertook this type of direct action.'
UN experts, human rights organisations, cultural figures, and hundreds of lawyers have also voiced alarm over the decision, warning it sets a dangerous precedent for criminalizing civil disobedience.
Saturday's demonstration echoed scenes from the previous weekend, when 29 protesters, including 83-year-old former priest Rev Sue Parfitt, were arrested at a similar gathering in Parliament Square.
In Manchester, police also made arrests at a protest in support of Palestine Action, while peaceful demonstrations took place in Cardiff and Derry.
The controversy surrounding Palestine Action's ban comes amid heightened tensions over the war in Gaza, where the International Court of Justice in The Hague is hearing a case brought by South Africa accusing Israel of committing genocide against Palestinians. Israel denies all allegations of wrongdoing.
* With Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
2 hours ago
- Arab News
Nigeria says jailed 44 for terrorism financing
KANO, Nigeria: Nigeria on Saturday slapped 44 Boko Haram jihadists with jail terms of up to 30 years for funding terrorist activities, a spokesman for a counterterrorism agency said. The convicted were among 54 suspects arraigned in four specially-constituted civilian courts set up at a military base in the town of Kainji in central Niger state, Abu Michael, a spokesman for Nigeria's counterterrorism center said in a statement. On Wednesday, Nigeria resumed trials of the suspects seven years after it suspended prosecution of over 1,000 people suspected of ties with the jihadist group that has been waging an insurgency since 2009 to establish a caliphate. 'The verdicts delivered from the trials resulted in prison sentences ranging from 10 to 30 years, all to be served with hard labor,' Michael said. 'With the latest convictions, Nigeria has now secured a total of 785 cases involving terrorism financing and other terrorism-related offenses,' said the statement. The trial of the remaining 10 cases was adjourned to a later date, he said. Nigeria is listed as a 'grey list country' by international monitors alongside South Sudan, South Africa, Monaco and Croatia due to deficiencies in preventing money laundering and terrorism financing. The Nigerian military's 16-year campaign to crush the jihadists in the northeast has killed more than 40,000 people and displaced around two million from their homes, according to the United Nations. The violence has also spilt over into neighboring Cameroon, Chad and Niger. In October 2017, Nigeria began mass trials of the Islamist insurgents, more than eight years after the start of the violence. That phase of the trials, which lasted five months, saw the convictions of 200 jihadist fighters with sentencing ranging from 'death penalty and life imprisonment to prison terms of 20 to 70 years,' Michael said. The offenses for the convictions included attacks on women and children, the destruction of religious sites, the killing of civilians, and the abduction of women and children. Human rights groups accused the military of arbitrarily arresting thousands of civilians, with many being held for years without access to lawyers or being brought to court.
Arab News
6 hours ago
- Arab News
Why BCG's involvement in Gaza marks an all-time low for consulting firms
LONDON: A Financial Times investigation, published on July 4, found that a consulting firm connected to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation secured a multimillion-dollar contract to help shape the initiative and a proposal for the possible 'relocation' of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip. The Boston Consulting Group was found to have played a central role in designing and managing the US- and Israeli-backed project, which aimed to replace the UN as the primary coordinator of humanitarian aid in Gaza. Amid growing criticism, BCG denied any ongoing involvement in the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. In a June 7 statement, the firm said it initially provided 'pro bono support' in October 2024 to help launch 'an aid organization intended to operate alongside other relief efforts.' The firm said two senior US-based partners who led the initiative 'failed to disclose the full nature of the work' and later engaged in 'unauthorized' activities outside the firm's oversight. 'Their actions reflected a serious failure of judgment and adherence to our standards,' the firm said. 'We are shocked and outraged by the actions of these two partners. They have been exited from the firm. 'BCG disavows the work they undertook. It has been stopped, and BCG has not and will not be paid for any of their work.' The company emphasized it is strengthening internal controls to prevent future breaches. 'We deeply regret that in this situation we did not live up to our standards,' the statement said. 'We are committed to accountability for our failures and humility in how we move forward.' • A Financial Times investigation examined BCG's role in Gaza aid planning, including controversial proposals for Palestinian relocation. • BCG disavowed the work and fired two senior partners, but documents suggest deeper involvement and lapses in internal oversight. • The scandal underscores wider concerns about consulting firms' ethics, with similar controversies involving PwC, KPMG, EY and McKinsey. Following the FT story, BCG issued another statement on July 6 disputing aspects of the reporting. 'Recent media reporting has misrepresented BCG's role in post-war Gaza reconstruction,' the firm said. BCG reiterated that the initiative was not an official company project and was carried out in secret. 'Two former partners initiated this work, even though the lead partner was categorically told not to,' the statement read. 'This work was not a BCG project. It was orchestrated and run secretly outside any BCG scope or approvals. We fully disavow this work. BCG was not paid for any of this work.' However, individuals familiar with 'Aurora' told the FT that BCG's involvement ran deeper. The report revealed that BCG created a financial model for Gaza's postwar reconstruction that included scenarios for mass displacement. This revelation intensified scrutiny of the consulting industry's ethical boundaries. 'Consulting companies… are held to a higher standard of professionalism and ethics than other lines of work,' Dr. Abdel Aziz Aluwaisheg, the Gulf Cooperation Council assistant secretary-general for political affairs and negotiation, wrote in an April opinion piece for Arab News. He warned that without corrective action, major firms risk alienating clients. Indeed, in recent years, top consulting firms like McKinsey, PwC, KPMG, and EY have faced growing scrutiny for putting profit over ethics, with scandals revealing conduct lapses worldwide. McKinsey, for instance, faced heavy backlash for its role in the US opioid crisis. The firm was accused of helping Purdue Pharma and other manufacturers to aggressively market addictive painkillers, including OxyContin, The New York Times reported. Aluwaisheg noted in his op-ed that some of these ethical lapses 'are quite common throughout the consulting business.' However, he added, 'big firms are more likely to commit them,' citing sprawling operations that limit senior management oversight. The industry's core business model may be the issue: consulting firms adopted law firms' high-fee model for expert advice — without their legal liability. Despite this, demand for consulting services remains high. Aluwaisheg believes governments and businesses will continue to need outside expertise. Still, accountability concerns have prompted some governments to take action. In February, Saudi Arabia's Public Investment Fund banned PwC from taking on new advisory and consulting contracts for one year. Some media outlets reported that the decision was related to an ethical violation tied to an alleged recruitment of a senior-level employee from the client's side. The suspension did not impact PwC's auditing work. These events highlight ongoing concerns over consulting firms' roles in controversial actions. In April 2024, KPMG's Dutch arm was fined $25 million after over 500 staff cheated on internal training exams, Reuters reported. Yet the BCG case may represent a new low for the industry. The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation's model bypassed traditional organizations like the UN, restricted aid distribution to limited sites under Israeli oversight and relied on private security contractors. This move has had deadly consequences. According to Gaza's health authority, at least 740 Palestinians have been killed and almost 4,900 injured while attempting to reach aid centers, drawing condemnation from humanitarian organizations and UN officials. UN aid chief Tom Fletcher called the initiative a 'fig leaf for further violence and displacement' of Palestinians in the war-torn enclave. In a July 10 letter to the FT editor, BCG's CEO Christoph Schweizer pushed back against the allegations that his firm endorsed or profited from projects related to Gaza. 'None of that is true,' Schweizer wrote, adding that 'a few people from BCG were involved in such work. They never should have been.' Adding another layer to the controversy, FT reported on July 6 that staff from the Tony Blair Institute were also implicated in postwar planning that included scenarios for mass Palestinian displacement — despite being prominent advocates for peace in the Middle East. The plan, seen by the FT, imagined Gaza as a regional economic hub, complete with a 'Trump Riviera' and 'Elon Musk Smart Manufacturing Zone,' based on financial models developed by BCG. While the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change denied authoring 'The Great Trust' blueprint, it acknowledged two staff joined Gaza planning calls and chats. It also denied backing population relocation. Arab News approached the TBI for comment, but did not receive a response by the time of publication. Nevertheless, its involvement has triggered additional concerns about the ethics of postwar reconstruction planning and the role of consulting firms in shaping policies with far-reaching humanitarian consequences.
Arab News
9 hours ago
- Arab News
Entente cordiale: Macron's visit helps reset UK-France relations
French-UK relations have often been in the political and economic 'deep freeze' since Brexit. Yet the two G7 and G20 nations have reemerged in recent years as regional leaders, including building Europe's relationship with US President Donald Trump's administration. The warmer Franco-UK ties were showcased again this week with President Emmanuel Macron making his first UK state visit, to London and Windsor Castle. The last such state visit by a French president to the UK was by Nicolas Sarkozy almost two decades ago in 2008. While Starmer enjoys a good relationship with Macron, the warming of UK ties with France actually began under his predecessor as prime minister, Rishi Sunak, after the latter agreed to a deal on the so-called Northern Ireland protocol between London and Brussels. This removed a huge post-Brexit barrier in UK relations with the 27 EU member states. Moreover, both Macron and Sunak assumed their nation's highest public office at an early age. Previously, both had served as finance ministers having previously earned their fortunes in the financial services industry. The warming of the so-called UK-French entente cordiale has continued under Starmer, and with King Charles and his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth, both playing a key role in bilateral relations in recent times, too. Charles made a state visit to France in 2023, and Macron spoke of the late queen's affection for France when he attended her funeral. Queen Elizabeth made many trips to France during her reign. Her first was in 1957, four years after her coronation; her last state visit was in June 2014, when she visited Paris and Normandy. This week, Macron laid flowers at her tomb in Windsor. Specific issues on the agenda this week included migration, and shared foreign policy and security goals, such as Ukraine and the Trump administration's trade tariffs. There is a potential upside in many of these issues from a stronger UK-France relationship. Take the example of security whereby London and Paris are nuclear states with UN Security Council permanent membership, unlike other European partners. The 2010 Lancaster House agreement opened a window to jointly update nuclear arsenals which is, as yet unfulfilled, and there is potential for broader military coordination. Positive as this all is, however, bilateral ties continue to have some challenges in the post-Brexit era. During those long UK-EU divorce negotiations, France took one of the hardest lines on the UK's exit from the Brussels-based club. This reflects the complex, contradictory relationship that Paris has long had with London in the context of EU affairs. The ardently pro-Brussels Macron, who believes Brexit to be an act of political vandalism to the Continent, was frequently accused by UK ministers of holding up progress in exit negotiations after the UK's 2016 referendum. The warmer Franco-UK ties were showcased this week with President Macron making his first UK state visit. Andrew Hammond Macron's Brexit positioning, including his robust stance on precluding future UK access to the single market, was reinforced by broader French plans to pitch Paris as a competing financial center to London which began in earnest under the presidency of Francois Hollande. This saw former Finance Minister Michel Sapin and Hollande's Brexit Special Envoy Christian Noyer, former Bank of France governor, openly promoting Paris with key financial firms. This has continued under Macron as he hailed the decision to relocate the European Banking Agency to Paris from London as 'recognition of France's attractiveness and European commitment.' French officials hope that the EBA's relocation will help bring still more UK banking jobs to the French capital. What France's position on Brexit underlines is how each EU state has distinctive political, economic, and social interests that have informed their stance on the UK's exit. Thus, while the EU-27 were in general remarkably unified in their negotiations with London, the positions of the individual countries varied according to factors such as trade and wider economic ties and patterns of migration with the UK, domestic election pressures, and levels of Euroskeptic support within their populations. The divergent and complex positions of EU states thus range from the UK's fellow non-eurozone member Sweden, whose political and economic interests are broadly aligned with UK positions, to countries that have more complicated positions, including France. While the position of Paris has now moderated, especially in the wake of the Northern Ireland protocol deal, the two nations remain misaligned in some key areas, including fishing rights. Take another example of migration where Sunak and Macron struck an initial agreement to stop people illegally crossing the English Channel. That deal stepped up UK payments to France to increase patrols on its beaches and led to closer police collaboration. However, the numbers making the crossing did not decline. This led Sunak to announce a law to try to make asylum claims inadmissible from those who travel to the UK in small boats. Today, Starmer is under growing pressure to deliver on this agenda, too, including from the new Reform UK party led by top Brexiteer Nigel Farage. This week, Starmer and Macron agreed on a new 'one in, one out' return scheme under which the UK would deport to France undocumented people arriving in small boats in return for accepting an equal number of legitimate asylum-seekers with UK family connections. Only time will tell how successful this will be in halting illegal migrants making so-called small boat crossings of the English Channel. Taken together, this underlines that relations are positive between Starmer and Macron. However, the distinctive post-Brexit interests of Paris and London will continue to drive bilateral tensions from time to time, and this will remain a barrier to a full reset of relations.
