Human rights group loses challenge over jet part exports amid Gaza conflict
In September last year, the Government suspended export licences for weapons and military equipment following a review of Israel's compliance with international humanitarian law in the conflict.
The grave risk to life in the ongoing military operations in the Gaza Strip is not created by the F-35 carve-out, and would not be removed by suspension of the export from the UK of F-35 parts into the F-35 programme High Court ruling
But an exemption was made for some licences related to parts for F-35s, which are part of an international defence programme.
The DBT defended the challenge, with its barristers telling a four-day hearing in London that the carve-out is 'consistent with the rules of international law'.
In a 72-page ruling on Monday, Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn dismissed the legal challenge.
The senior judges said that 'the conduct of international relations' is a matter for the executive, rather than the courts, and that it would be unnecessary to decide whether there was a 'significant risk' that the carve-out could facilitate crimes.
Defence Secretary John Healey had said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' (PA)
They added: 'The grave risk to life in the ongoing military operations in the Gaza Strip is not created by the F-35 carve-out, and would not be removed by suspension of the export from the UK of F-35 parts into the F-35 programme.'
The High Court was previously told that the decision to 'carve out' licences related to F-35 components followed advice from Defence Secretary John Healey, who said a suspension would impact the 'whole F-35 programme' and have a 'profound impact on international peace and security'.
The F-35 programme is an international defence programme which produces and maintains the fighter jets, with the UK contributing components for both assembly lines and an international pool.
Israel is not one of the 'partner nations' of the programme, the court heard, but is a customer and can order new F-35 aircraft and draw on a pool for spare parts.
The two judges later said they agreed with barristers for the DBT, who said it was not possible for the UK to 'unilaterally' ensure that UK-made parts did not reach Israel.
Demonstrators outside the Royal Courts of Justice, central London during an earlier hearing (PA)
Lord Justice Males and Mrs Justice Steyn said: 'In short, the Secretary of State reasonably concluded that there was no realistic possibility of persuading all other partner nations that F-35 exports to Israel should be suspended.'
'Accordingly he was faced with the blunt choice of accepting the F-35 carve-out or withdrawing from the F-35 Programme and accepting all the defence and diplomatic consequences which would ensue,' they added.
The two judges also said the case was about a 'much more focused issue' than the carve-out itself.
They continued: 'That issue is whether it is open to the court to rule that the UK must withdraw from a specific multilateral defence collaboration which is reasonably regarded by the responsible ministers as vital to the defence of the UK and to international peace and security, because of the prospect that some UK manufactured components will or may ultimately be supplied to Israel, and may be used in the commission of a serious violation of international humanitarian law in the conflict in Gaza.
'Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts.'
Following the ruling, Al-Haq director general Shawan Jabarin said the long-running case had caused a 'significant impact'.
He continued: 'Despite the outcome of today, this case has centred the voice of the Palestinian people and has rallied significant public support, and it is just the start.
'This is what matters, that we continue on all fronts in our work to defend our collective human values and work towards achieving justice for the Palestinians.'
A Government spokesperson said: 'The court has upheld this Government's thorough and lawful decision-making on this matter.
'This shows that the UK operates one of the most robust export control regimes in the world. We will continue to keep our defence export licensing under careful and continual review.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
28 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Bid to temporarily block Palestine Action ban to be heard at High Court
A bid to temporarily block the banning of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation is set to be heard at the High Court on Friday, ahead of a potential legal challenge against the move. Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, is seeking to bring a legal challenge against the Home Office over Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under the Terrorism Act 2000. The motion could become law as early as this weekend once it has been signed off by Ms Cooper, which would make membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. The move was announced after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused around £7 million worth of damage. At a hearing on Friday, Mr Justice Chamberlain is due to decide whether to grant 'interim relief' to Ms Ammori, which would temporarily block the legislation from coming into effect at midnight on Saturday as currently planned. The hearing is due to begin at 10.30am at the Royal Courts of Justice, with a further hearing to decide whether Ms Ammori will be given the green light to challenge the Government's decision expected to be held later in July. Ms 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'. MPs in the Commons voted 385 to 26, majority 359, in favour of proscribing the group on Wednesday, before the House of Lords backed the move without a vote on Thursday. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident. They appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Thursday after being charged with conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for a purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom, and conspiracy to commit criminal damage, under the Criminal Law Act 1977. They were remanded into custody and will appear at the Old Bailey on July 18. Counter Terrorism Policing South East said on Wednesday that a 41-year-old woman arrested on suspicion of assisting an offender had been released on bail until September 19, and a 23-year-old man who was arrested has been released without charge.
Finextra
an hour ago
- Finextra
UK bids to cut red tape for fintech firms
The UK's Regulatory Innovation Office is to work with the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum to cut red tape for fintechs as they navigate complex regulation. 0 Last year, the UK's burgeoning fintech sector attracted $3.6 billion in investment, representing a key pillar in the Government's go-for-growth strategy. Technology secretary Peter Kyle says fragmented rules and regulatory complexity slow down innovation, delay safer financial products reaching the public, and deter investment. The collaborative work between the RIO and DRCF will lead to creation of as unified digital library providing 'one stop' access to digital policy and regulations for innovators. Kyle says the initiative will better help fintech firms navigate through the maze of regulations, noting that this could be especially tough for smaller companies, who often don't have teams of compliance experts on hand.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Migrant policies ‘creating more barriers to child safety', says charity
Conditions at the UK-France border are becoming 'more dangerous' for young people, a charity has warned, after it was revealed that at least 15 children died trying to cross the Channel last year. Young children hide under tables when they think they hear the sound of sirens because they are commonly scared of the police, according to organisation Project Play, who raised concerns of teargas and evictions. Advocacy coordinator Kate O'Neill, based in northern France, told the PA news agency there has been a rise in police violence which is disproportionately harming children. She said: 'Ultimately the children we're meeting every day are not safe. 'They're exposed to a level of violence, whether it's they are directly victims of it or the witness. 'We're ultimately at all times putting out fires… the underlying issue is these policies of border securitisation… that are creating more and more barriers to child safety and child protection.' She said there was hope when the Labour Government took office a year ago that there would be some improvement, adding: 'This is not at all what we've seen. 'They continued to make conditions more difficult and more dangerous.' She said: 'The smash-the-gangs narrative is not effective and it's harmful because ultimately the only way to put the gangs out of business is to cut the need for them.' It comes as the grassroots organisation published a report that said at least 15 children died trying to cross the English Channel last year, more than the total of the past four years combined. The charity that offers play services, parental support and safeguarding casework to children aged 0-18 living in sites around Calais and Dunkirk, documented rising violence, trauma and child deaths linked with UK border policies and funding to the French to ramp up enforcement in 2024. In February this year, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper agreed to re-purpose £7 million of cash to French counterparts to bolster enforcement action on the nation's coastline to tackle Channel crossings. 'What we really need to see is some cross-border accountability for the incidents and the fatalities in the Channel,' Ms O'Neill said. The campaigner said one of the main calls as a result of the group's research is for an official source of the number of deaths and information on these deaths to be recorded. Figures for the report came from International Organisation for Migration, Calais Migrant Solidarity and other networks in northern France. 'We don't have the identities of all of them. 'In fact, these deaths are going unrecorded and unreported,' she said. One in five crossing the English Channel between 2018 and 2024 were children, according to Project Play. Meanwhile, Ms O'Neill said tactics for French police to intervene in crossing attempts in shallow waters is already happening despite the changes needed to the rules to allow this having not yet come into force. She said: 'This is not a new tactic… it's something that has been happening for a long time in Calais and surrounding areas. 'My feeling is that this is increasing based on the number of testimonies we're receiving from children and their families recently.' 'It's really dangerous because the children often are in the middle of the boats.' But on Friday, Ms Cooper said intervention in French waters was 'critical'. 'That's one of the big things that has changed, the way in which the boats operate in shallow waters,' she said. 'We have to have the action on those because that's that is where the prevention needs to take place.' Ms Cooper also pressed the case for introducing the new criminal offence of endangering life at sea under the Government's Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, after seeing 'awful cases' of children being crushed to death in the middle of overcrowded boats. Project Play worked with more than 1,000 children in 2024, and believes in the last few weeks there have been a 'very large amount' of children they worked with who were born and went to school in a European country, such as Germany, Denmark and Sweden. Ms O'Neill said families' visas granted five or 10 years ago in other European countries for refuge have since expired and they have not been allowed to stay, which she said is behind the increase in crossings to the UK. She said since Brexit meant the UK left the Dublin regulation, the country is a 'viable option'. The European Union law set out that the first EU country an asylum seeker entered was responsible for processing their claim, and the UK can no longer send asylum seekers back to other member states since leaving the bloc. Ms O'Neill said: 'Most people we're speaking to, that is why they're going. 'They're not going to claim benefits from the UK or to do anything for free, but it's the next nearest safe place they can be. 'This needs to be addressed… as a European-wide issue instead of just a UK-France thing.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We all want to end dangerous small boat crossings, which threaten lives and undermine our border security. 'Through international intelligence sharing under our Border Security Command, enhanced enforcement operations in Northern France and tougher legislation in the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, we are strengthening international partnerships and boosting our ability to identify, disrupt, and dismantle criminal gangs.'
