Judgment due in Palestine Action court bid for temporary block on terror ban
The move is to come into force at midnight after being 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.
The Home Office is opposing bids to delay the ban from becoming law, and the potential launch of a legal challenge against the decision.
Protesters outside the Royal Courts of Justice in central London (Lucy North/PA)
At the end of a hearing on Friday, Mr Justice Chamberlain said he 'realistically' planned to give his decision after 5.30pm.
Lawyers for Ms Ammori said that if the temporary block was not granted, a bid to appeal against that decision could be made on Friday evening.
During the hearing, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, told the London court that this would be the first time a 'direct action civil disobedience group, which does not advocate for violence, has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists'.
He added 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'.
Quoting Ms Ammori, the barrister said that the group had 'never encouraged harm to any person at all' and that its goal 'is to put ourselves in the way of the military machine'.
He continued: 'We ask you, in the first instance, to suspend until July 21 what we say is an ill-considered, discriminatory and authoritarian abuse of statutory power which is alien to the basic tradition of the common law and is contrary to the Human Rights Act.'
The hearing later in July is expected to deal with whether Ms Ammori can bring a High Court challenge over the planned proscription.
Mr Husain later said that to proscribe an organisation, the Home Secretary 'has got to believe that the organisation is concerned in terrorism'.
Demonstrators banged drums outside the court (Lucy North/PA)
Some 81 organisations are already proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Hamas, al Qaida and National Action.
Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court 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'.
The barrister 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.
The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, saying 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.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Powys County Times
an hour ago
- Powys County Times
Cooper orders ‘crackdown' on suspected illegal working for delivery apps
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has ordered a nationwide immigration 'enforcement crackdown' which the Government says will target illegal working in the gig economy. Officers will carry out checks in hotspots across the country where they suspect asylum seekers are working as delivery riders without permission. It comes after Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat said they would ramp up facial verification and fraud checks over the coming months after conversations with ministers. Last week the shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, claimed in a post on X to have found evidence of people working illegally for the food delivery firms during a visit to a hotel used to house asylum seekers. On Saturday, the Home Office said anyone caught 'flagrantly abusing the system in this way' will face having state support discontinued, whether entitlement to accommodation or payments. 'Strategic, intel-driven activity will bring together officers across the UK and place an increased focus on migrants suspected of working illegally whilst in taxpayer-funded accommodation or receiving financial support,' the Home Office said. 'The law is clear that asylum seekers are only entitled to this support if they would otherwise be destitute.' Businesses who illegally employ people will also face fines of up to £60,000 per worker, director disqualifications and potential prison sentences of up to five years. Asylum seekers in the UK are normally barred from work while their claim is being processed, though permission can be applied for after a year of waiting. It comes as the Government struggles with its pledge to 'smash the gangs' of people-smugglers facilitating small boat crossings in the English Channel, which have reached record levels this year. Some 20,600 people have made the journey so far in 2025, up 52% on the same period in 2024. Ms Cooper said: 'Illegal working undermines honest business and undercuts local wages, the British public will not stand for it and neither will this Government. 'Often those travelling to the UK illegally are sold a lie by the people-smuggling gangs that they will be able to live and work freely in this country, when in reality they end up facing squalid living conditions, minimal pay and inhumane working hours. 'We are surging enforcement action against this pull factor, on top of returning 30,000 people with no right to be here and tightening the law through our Plan for Change.' Home Office director of enforcement, compliance and crime, Eddy Montgomery, said: 'This next step of co-ordinated activity will target those who seek to work illegally in the gig economy and exploit their status in the UK. 'That means if you are found to be working with no legal right to do so, we will use the full force of powers available to us to disrupt and stop this abuse. There will be no place to hide.' Deliveroo has said the firm takes a 'zero tolerance approach' to abuse on the platform and that despite measures put in place over the last year, 'criminals continue to seek new ways to abuse the system'. An Uber Eats spokesperson has said they will continue to invest in tools to detect illegal work and remove fraudulent accounts, while Just Eat says it is committed to strengthening safeguards 'in response to these complex and evolving challenges.' Responding to the announcement, Mr Philp said: 'It shouldn't take a visit to an asylum hotel by me as shadow home secretary to shame the Government into action.' He added: 'The Government should investigate if there is wrongdoing by the delivery platforms and if there is a case to answer, they should be prosecuted. 'This is a very serious issue because illegal working is a pull factor for illegal immigration into the UK – people smugglers actually advertise it.'
South Wales Guardian
2 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Some consequences of Palestine Action ban ‘overstated', says High Court judge
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. Judge Mr Justice Chamberlain refused to grant the temporary block, finding there was a 'strong public interest in maintaining the order in force'. Lawyers for Palestine Action will now make a last-minute bid at the Court of Appeal to challenge this decision, as the ban is expected to come into force at midnight. 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' if the temporary block was refused, but a later challenge against the ban succeeded. 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: 'It follows that it is hyperbole to talk of the claimant or others being 'gagged' in this respect, as the claimant has alleged. 'They could not incur criminal liability based on their past association with a group which was not proscribed at the time. '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 judge later said that if people choose to continue to express support for Palestine Action post-proscription, they may face criminal consequences, adding: 'This, however, is the intended effect of the order. It is how it achieves its aim of disrupting the activities of the proscribed organisation.' The proposal to ban the group 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 the High Court 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 in the wider legal challenge, due around July 21. 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 banning of the group, adding it could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Following the High Court's decision on Friday, Ms Ammori said: '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.'
South Wales Guardian
2 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Cooper orders ‘crackdown' on suspected illegal working for delivery apps
Officers will carry out checks in hotspots across the country where they suspect asylum seekers are working as delivery riders without permission. It comes after Deliveroo, Uber Eats and Just Eat said they would ramp up facial verification and fraud checks over the coming months after conversations with ministers. Last week the shadow home secretary, Chris Philp, claimed in a post on X to have found evidence of people working illegally for the food delivery firms during a visit to a hotel used to house asylum seekers. On Saturday, the Home Office said anyone caught 'flagrantly abusing the system in this way' will face having state support discontinued, whether entitlement to accommodation or payments. 'Strategic, intel-driven activity will bring together officers across the UK and place an increased focus on migrants suspected of working illegally whilst in taxpayer-funded accommodation or receiving financial support,' the Home Office said. 'The law is clear that asylum seekers are only entitled to this support if they would otherwise be destitute.' Businesses who illegally employ people will also face fines of up to £60,000 per worker, director disqualifications and potential prison sentences of up to five years. Asylum seekers in the UK are normally barred from work while their claim is being processed, though permission can be applied for after a year of waiting. It comes as the Government struggles with its pledge to 'smash the gangs' of people-smugglers facilitating small boat crossings in the English Channel, which have reached record levels this year. Some 20,600 people have made the journey so far in 2025, up 52% on the same period in 2024. Ms Cooper said: 'Illegal working undermines honest business and undercuts local wages, the British public will not stand for it and neither will this Government. 'Often those travelling to the UK illegally are sold a lie by the people-smuggling gangs that they will be able to live and work freely in this country, when in reality they end up facing squalid living conditions, minimal pay and inhumane working hours. 'We are surging enforcement action against this pull factor, on top of returning 30,000 people with no right to be here and tightening the law through our Plan for Change.' Home Office director of enforcement, compliance and crime, Eddy Montgomery, said: 'This next step of co-ordinated activity will target those who seek to work illegally in the gig economy and exploit their status in the UK. 'That means if you are found to be working with no legal right to do so, we will use the full force of powers available to us to disrupt and stop this abuse. There will be no place to hide.' Deliveroo has said the firm takes a 'zero tolerance approach' to abuse on the platform and that despite measures put in place over the last year, 'criminals continue to seek new ways to abuse the system'. An Uber Eats spokesperson has said they will continue to invest in tools to detect illegal work and remove fraudulent accounts, while Just Eat says it is committed to strengthening safeguards 'in response to these complex and evolving challenges.' Responding to the announcement, Mr Philp said: 'It shouldn't take a visit to an asylum hotel by me as shadow home secretary to shame the Government into action.' He added: 'The Government should investigate if there is wrongdoing by the delivery platforms and if there is a case to answer, they should be prosecuted. 'This is a very serious issue because illegal working is a pull factor for illegal immigration into the UK – people smugglers actually advertise it.' Mr Philp also said women and girls were being put at risk because deliveries were being made to their homes by people 'from nationalities we know have very high rates of sex offending', without specifying which nationalities he was referring to.
