The Home Secretary made a ‘significant’ error, judges rule
As well as finding that the ban was disproportionate, the high court found that the home secretary made a “significant” error by acting contrary to her own policy.
Three judges, led by the president of the king’s bench division, Dame Victoria Sharp, said the then-home secretary Yvette Cooper wrongly considered the advantages of banning Palestine Action in relation to the wider criminal offences that could be applied to members of the group.
“This conclusion may appear to rest on a very narrow basis – the home secretary had, after all, formed the belief that Palestine Action is an organisation concerned in terrorism and in these proceedings the claimant does not challenge that decision.
“However, this conclusion is a direct and necessary consequence of the policy the home secretary has applied to the exercise of her discretion to proscribe such organisations.
“The purpose of the policy is that not all organisations that meet the concerned in terrorism requirement should be proscribed.”
What happens to Palestine Action now its ban has been ruled unlawful?
The home secretary’s decision to ban Palestine Action under anti-terrorism laws has been ruled unlawful by three senior high court judges. Where does this leave the direct action group, its supporters and the government’s attempts to combat it?
Our legal affairs correspondent Haroon Siddique explains here:
Two Jewish groups have expressed their deep concern over today’s ruling and welcomed the government’s intent to appeal.
In a joint statement, the Board of Deputies of British Jews and the Jewish Leadership Council said:
We recognise the vital importance of judicial oversight in matters of national security and civil liberties.
However, the practical impact of Palestine Action’s activities on Jewish communal life has been significant and deeply unsettling.
Conservative MPs welcome government's plans to appeal ruling
We have some reaction from the Conservatives, saying they welcome the government’s decision to appeal against the high court’s decision on Palestine Action and called for tighter rules on proscription.
Chris Philp, the shadow home secretary, said Palestine Action engaged in “organised political violence and cannot be tolerated”.
He added: “Palestine Action’s campaign is built on intimidation, destruction, and violence. The public expect the law to protect them.
“Conservatives welcome the Home Office’s appeal to this ruling. There can be no hesitation when public safety and national security are at stake.”
The shadow foreign secretary, Priti Patel, said it was “time to tighten up the rules on the proscription of such groups to ensure they cannot get away with such disgraceful behaviour”.
Ben Saul, the UN’s special rapporteur on human rights and counter-terrorism, has called for the home secretary to set aside the proscription and said authorities should apologise to peaceful protesters who were caught up in the ban.
A spokesperson for Saul said: “As an intervener in the case, the special rapporteur argued that proscription violated the UK’s international human rights obligations, because it was not a necessary and proportionate restriction on the human rights to freedoms of association, peaceful assembly and expression.
“The special rapporteur therefore notes and welcomes the court’s finding that proscription was indeed disproportionate.”
The spokesperson said Saul “invites the home secretary to reflect on this judgment and accept the court’s conclusion to set aside proscription of Palestine Action”.
They added: “Taking this step will enable the relevant authorities to take no further action against those who legitimately expressed their beliefs about Israel and Palestine since 5 July 2025 and were caught up in the policing of the unlawful ban; and also, to apologise to those affected for stigmatising them as terrorists.”
Lord Peter Hain, the former Labour cabinet minister and anti-apartheid campaigner who voted in the Lords against the proscription of Palestine Action, welcomed the high court’s ruling, saying that the government had brought the law “into disrepute”.
“Although I have never been on a Palestine Action platform nor participated in any of its protests, the government was wrong to proscribe it,” he said in a statement.
“Equating Palestine Action with real terrorist groups like Islamic State was oppressive and ridiculous.”
He said activists spraying paint on military aircraft or attacking property should be “prosecuted for criminal damage, not for terrorism”.
He added: “Otherwise, suffragettes should have been banned as terrorists for attacking as they did shop windows, government buildings, and political party offices, sometimes using hammers, stones, or iron bars, as well as setting fire to unoccupied buildings such as churches and railway stations, or cutting telephone wires and hiding small homemade bombs inside mailboxes and attempting to bomb Westminster Abbey.
“The government brought the law into disrepute by its proscription leading to hundreds of British citizens protesting peacefully, including retired magistrates and vicars, being arrested for terrorism, wasting police resources and clogging up courts, instead of targeting real criminals.”
Assistant commissioner Laurence Taylor, national head of counter-terrorism policing, said officers will enforce the ban “pragmatically and proportionately”.
He said:
Policing’s role is to enforce the law, and to do so without fear or favour, as the public would expect. Proscription is, and always has been, a matter for the government. Following today’s judgment, the home secretary has stated she intends to lodge an appeal.
The court has ordered that the proscription order remains in force until further order of the court. We recognise this is an unusual set of circumstances, and until further order by the court, counter-terrorism policing will approach enforcement pragmatically and proportionately, and will continue to work with forces across the country.
The PA news agency reported that officers were policing a group of activists outside the high court, some of whom were carrying signs that read “I support Palestine Action”.
Speaking outside the court, Insp Paul Perversi said the activists would be advised they could be prosecuted at a later date.
“As far as we’re concerned, as police, Palestine Action is still a proscribed organisation and my officers are engaging with protesters holding the signs just advising them that technically, it’s illegal, and they could face prosecution,” he said.
“It’s being recorded on body worn camera to be acted upon later if deemed appropriate. But at the moment officers are just engaging with members of the public,” he added.
“The officers have all been briefed to act with integrity, professionalism, courage, and importantly, a bit of compassion.”
Key event
The protest group Defend Our Juries said more than 2,700 people have been arrested for holding up signs saying “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action” since the ban came into effect in July.
More than 500 of those arrested, who include vicars, pensioners and military veterans, have been charged, although no one has yet been convicted.
Defend Our Juries said there was a large presence outside the high court today but that no one was arrested for holding signs saying they supported Palestine Action. This corresponds with a statement from the Met police earlier today that officers will focus on gathering evidence of those expressing support for the group rather than making arrests.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Defend Our Juries said: “Thousands of people of conscience saw that branding protest as terrorism was a move straight out of the dictator’s playbook. Together we took action at great personal risk – inspired by each other’s courage. We helped make this proscription unenforceable by saying “we do not comply”.”
The Met police said it will stop arresting people for showing support for Palestine action following the high court ruling, but will gather evidence for potential future prosecution.
The Met, which covers London and is expecting shows of support for Palestine Action as soon as today, said:
The group remains proscribed pending the outcome of any Government appeal, which means expressing support is still a criminal offence.
We recognise these are unusual circumstances and there will likely be some confusion among the public as to what happens next.
From a Metropolitan police perspective, officers will continue to identify offences where support for Palestine Action is being expressed, but they will focus on gathering evidence of those offences and the people involved to provide opportunities for enforcement at a later date, rather than making arrests at the time.
This is the most proportionate approach we can take, acknowledging the decision reached by the court while recognising that proceedings are not yet fully concluded.
This approach relates solely to the expression of support for Palestine Action. We will continue to intervene and make arrests where we see people crossing the line from lawful protest to intimidate, to damage property, to use violence, to stir up racial hatred or to commit other offences.
We are mindful that this decision comes at a time when the impact of a prolonged period of significant protest continues to be felt by communities across London, in particular Jewish communities. We will continue to take an assertive and determined approach to dealing with antisemitism and other hate crime, acting decisively against anyone who tries to use the cover of protest to cause fear and distress to Londoners.
The ruling presents other immediate challenges for police and prosecutors who had to execute the legal ban, with hundreds arrested for showing support for Palestine Action, and thus deemed to be breaking terrorism laws.
The first cases of people charged with breaking terrorism laws because of the ban are just weeks away.
One source said there was an “air of uncertainty” about whether such cases would proceed. Further direction from the high court is expected soon.
Officers will focus on gathering evidence rather than making arrests, says Met police
The Metropolitan police has released a statement after the high court’s ruling this morning, warning that the proscription remains in place and so showing support for Palestine Action is still a criminal offence.
The Met acknowledged that the “unusual circumstances” may cause some confusion among the public as to what happens next, it said that officers will “continue to identify offences where support for Palestine Action is being expressed, but they will focus on gathering evidence of those offences and the people involved to provide opportunities for enforcement at a later date, rather than making arrests at the time”.
It added: “This is the most proportionate approach we can take, acknowledging the decision reached by the court while recognising that proceedings are not yet fully concluded.
“This approach relates solely to the expression of support for Palestine Action. We will continue to intervene and make arrests where we see people crossing the line from lawful protest to intimidate, to damage property, to use violence, to stir up racial hatred or to commit other offences.”
Updated
Max Wilkinson, the Liberal Democrat MP for Cheltenham and home affairs spokesperson, said the ban was a “grave misuse of terrorism laws”.
“Placing Palestine Action in the same legal category as Isis was disproportionate and risked undermining public trust and civil liberties,” he said.
“This ruling does not place anyone above the law. Any individual members of Palestine Action who are accused of serious offences such as vandalism and violent disorder should be investigated, prosecuted and, if convicted, sentenced accordingly.
“But these are potential criminal acts and not comparable to the horrors of terrorism.”
Shami Chakrabarti, a Labour peer and former shadow attorney general, said the ruling “will resonate with the common sense of most people in Britain” and that she hoped “the government will listen”.
She added: “Whilst a very small amount of Palestine Action’s activity met the definition of “terrorism”, the decision to proscribe the whole organisation and its many peaceful supporters was disproportionate.
“Let those engaged in criminal damage be prosecuted but don’t make peaceful protesters guilty by association.”
Yvette Cooper should resign, say Palestine Action activists
Palestine Action activists have called for former home secretary Yvette Cooper, who made the decision to proscribe the group last year, to resign.
In a speech outside the high court this morning, activist Lisa Minerva Luxx said: “They (high court judges) are not saying it is unlawful now, they are saying it was always unlawful.
“This means that Yvette Cooper lied to the British public, lied to get it (the ban) through the House of Commons, she even lied to parliament.
“She lied when she said that she had intelligence on disturbing plans, she lied about nefarious funding and the courts have proven that none of that was true. She cannot be trusted to serve as a minister of this country in any capacity and she must resign today.”
Luxx also called for the current home secretary Shabana Mahmood and for prime minister Sir Keir Starmer to resign, adding: “The British government have betrayed the British people and this is a tiny morsel of a taster of how much they betrayed Palestinian people.
“The Government paid nearly a million pounds to persecute British people for having a moral compass that was at odds with their foreign interests.”
Cooper, now foreign secretary, and Starmer have not yet publicly commented on the ruling. Mahmood said she intends to appeal against the high court’s decision.
Updated
Joining calls for charges made against protesters to be dropped is Green party leader Zack Polanski.
In a statement, he said:
The court has ruled that the government’s authoritarian ban on Palestine Action was unlawful.
Now it is time for the government to stop criminalising the people protesting a genocide – and start ending the UK’s complicity.
Over 2,700 people have so far been arrested for holding a sign opposing genocide and the proscription of Palestine Action.
Those already charged should have those charges dropped, and the Crown Prosecution (Service) should discontinue action against all those arrested.
We are getting lots of reaction from rights and activist groups to the high court’s ruling this morning, many of them calling for the charges against protesters who have showed support for Palestine Action to be dropped.
Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK’s law and human rights director, described the ruling as a “vital affirmation of the right to protest”. He added: “The high court’s decision sends a clear message: the government cannot simply reach for sweeping counter‑terrorism powers to silence critics or suppress dissent … it draws an important line in the sand against attempts to narrow the democratic space and undermine public confidence in the right to speak out.
Greenpeace UK’s co-executive director Areeba Hamid said the government’s decision to ban a protest group “is the stuff of dystopian novels”. She added: “Arresting thousands of protesters – many of them pensioners who were simply holding signs – is the stuff of satire. Hopefully this ruling will deliver a much-needed reality check.”
Yasmine Ahmed, UK director of Human Rights Watch, called for a “thorough and independent investigation” on the government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action. She said the court’s ruling “reinforces what many of us having been saying all along- that the government’s misuse of terrorism legislation was a brazen and gross abuse of power that served to stifle legitimate criticism of Israel and those profiting from its atrocities”.
Stop the War Coalition has called on the Metropolitan police commissioner Mark Rowley and former home secretary Yvette Cooper to resign. Lindsey German, convener of the Stop the War, said: “Now the CPS must drop all the charges against those wrongly arrested and imprisoned without trial for peacefully protesting a genocide.”
Before the ban, Palestine Action had used direct action to target Israeli-linked companies in the UK, from occupying buildings and blocking access, to more disruptive methods such as spray-painting and damaging equipment. It particularly focused its demonstrations against factories of Israeli weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems, which the group describes on its website as its “main target”.
Founded in 2020 by activists Huda Ammori and Richard Barnard, Palestine Action campaigns against companies that it says are complicit in the “occupation, apartheid and genocide of Palestine”. In the wake of Israel’s war on Gaza, the group’s demonstrations intensified.
Since the ban took effect, thousands of arrests have been linked to support for Palestine Action under terrorism laws, as well as ongoing protests and legal challenges. Critics of the ban argue that damaging property does not amount to terrorism, with the UN human rights chief, Volker Türk, commenting that the proscription “appears disproportionate and unnecessary”.
The government has argued that the ban was justified on national security grounds, and that it was proportionate given the alleged escalation in the group’s activities.
Proscription of Palestine Action 'disproportionate', judges rule
The high court upheld two grounds of challenge, including that the ban was a disproportionate interference with the right to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.
The president of the king’s bench division, Dame Victoria Sharp, sitting with Mr Justice Swift and Mrs Justice Steyn, said that “Palestine Action is an organisation that promotes its political cause through criminality and encouragement of criminality”, but that proscription was still “disproportionate”.
In a 46-page judgment, she said: “A very small number of its actions have amounted to terrorist action within the definition [of the Terrorism Act 2000].”
Home secretary 'disappointed' by ruling, plans to appeal
Home secretary Shabana Mahmood said she was ‘disappointed’ by the ruling and that she plans to appeal it.
In a statement, she said:
I am disappointed by the court’s decision and disagree with the notion that banning this terrorist organisation is disproportionate.
“The proscription of Palestine Action followed a rigorous and evidence-based decision-making process, endorsed by parliament. The proscription does not prevent peaceful protest in support of the Palestinian cause, another point on which the court agrees.
“As a former lord chancellor, I have the deepest respect for our judiciary. Home secretaries must however retain the ability to take action to protect our national security and keep the public safe. I intend to fight this judgment in the court of appeal.”
Ban will stay in place until government decides on appeal
Judges Victoria Sharp, Jonathan Swift and Karen Steyn said the ban will remain in place while the government considers whether to appeal.
A group of protesters outside the high court erupted into cheers and chanted “Free Palestine” after the ruling was given, the PA news agency reported.
Updated
Ammori: This is a monumental victory for fundamental freedoms and for Palestine
Ammori has released a statement describing the high court’s ruling as a “monumental victory” and that the government proscribed Palestine Action as a terror group “in a Trumpian abuse of power”.
She said:
“This is a monumental victory both for our fundamental freedoms here in Britain and in the struggle for freedom for the Palestinian people, striking down a decision that will forever be remembered as one of the most extreme attacks on free speech in recent British history.
“Palestine Action is the first civil disobedience organisation that does not advocate for violence to be proscribed by the British Government as a ‘terrorist’ group, in a Trumpian abuse of power which would have seen this Labour Government proscribe the Suffragettes. This ban was unlawful, resulting in the unlawful arrest of nearly 3,000 people - among them priests, vicars, former magistrates and retired doctors – under terrorism laws for simply sitting in silence while holding signs reading: ‘I oppose genocide – I support Palestine Action’.
Updated
The co-founder of Palestine Action has won a legal challenge to the home secretary’s decision to ban the group under anti-terrorism laws.
The proscription of Palestine Action, which categorised it alongside the likes of Islamic State, was the first of a direct action protest group and attracted widespread condemnation as well as a civil disobedience campaign defying the ban, during which more than 2,000 people have been arrested.
On Friday, three judges, led by the president of the king’s bench division, Dame Victoria Sharp, ruled that the decision to proscribe the group was unlawful.
Read the full report by our legal affairs correspondent Haroon Siddique here:
UK ban on Palestine Action unlawful, high court judges rule
Palestine Action’s co-founder Huda Ammori has won a legal challenge against the decision to proscribe the group under anti-terrorism laws.
Here are some images from outside the high court coming through the newswires this morning:
The ruling, expected to begin at 10am, comes after a group of six Palestine Action activists were cleared of aggravated burglary last week over a break-in at an Israeli defence firm’s UK site.
The youngest of the group, Fatema Rajwani, 21, said the verdicts were a vindication of their cause.
After 18 months in jail, she was released on bail last Wednesday, having also been acquitted by a jury at Woolwich crown court of violent disorder in relation to the raid on the Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol, on 6 August 2024.
Rajwani told the Guardian: “The verdicts are a reflection of the reality that the first chance that the public had to decide what happened to us, they vindicated us. It is plain to see that the British public do not want their citizens to be scapegoated for this Labour government’s political aims, they do not want to be criminalised for supporting a people’s inalienable right to freedom, to dignity, and to self-determination.”
Read the full report by our legal affairs correspondent Haroon Siddique here:
Opening summary
The high court is set to rule on whether the Home Office’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist group was lawful.
Huda Ammori, the co-founder of Palestine Action, took legal action against the government to challenge the decision by then-home secretary Yvette Cooper to ban the group under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The ban, which took effect on 5 July 2025, made membership of, or support for, the direct action group a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
During a hearing in November, a lawyer for Ammori told the court in London that the ban was unlawful and should be quashed, saying the group had engaged in an “honourable tradition” of direct action and civil disobedience prior to proscription.
The court heard that there had been more than 2,000 arrests after Palestine Action’s proscription, including “priests, teachers, pensioners, retired British Army officers” and an “81-year-old former magistrate”.
Lawyers representing the Home Office said the proscription had had the intended effect of “disrupting PA’s [Palestine Action] pattern of escalatory conduct” and had “not prevented people from protesting in favour of the Palestinian people or against Israel’s actions in Gaza”.
Follow our blog to get the latest updates from the ruling.
Updated
