UK Supreme Court begins closed phase in Palestine Action ban appeal

The legal challenge against the ban on Palestine Action entered a closed phase at the UK Supreme Court on Thursday. This transition occurred after the government and the lawyers representing the group's co-founder finished their public arguments. The court will now hear secret evidence presented by the government in private sessions.

James Eadie KC, who is representing the Home Office, opened the proceedings by challenging the notion that Palestine Action fits into Britain's long tradition of civil disobedience. Eadie argued that the group's activities were planned and executed in secrecy to avoid detection. He stated that these actions resulted in serious damage to property, which he believed satisfied the legal criteria for terrorism.

Eadie emphasized that the court should respect the parliamentary decision to ban the group. He pointed to the direct-action group's history of damaging property belonging to Israeli weapons manufacturers as evidence of their intent. Specifically, he claimed that the campaign against the arms company Elbit Systems showed an intent to target Jewish businesses, a position that Palestine Action has consistently denied.

The government's case relies heavily on the determination made by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre, or JTAC, that the group is a terrorist organization. Eadie noted that the group's tactic of property damage was a primary factor in this assessment. When questioned by Judge Sales regarding the transparency of JTAC's membership, Eadie indicated that the membership list may not be a public document.

The demeanor in the courtroom on Thursday contrasted with the previous day. On Wednesday, Raza Husain KC, representing co-founder Huda Ammori, faced frequent interruptions from the judges. Despite this, Husain used the final public session on Thursday to rebut the government's claims. He argued that the ban has significantly impacted the freedom of speech and assembly for thousands of supporters.

Husain estimated that hundreds of thousands of people have had their political rights of speech, association, and assembly seriously interfered with or extinguished by the ban. He rejected the government's assertion that Palestine Action posed a threat to British democracy. Instead, he stated that the only threat the group posed was to the property of Elbit Systems and its supporters.

In response to the allegation that the group targeted Jewish-owned businesses, Husain cited statements from Andrew Feinstein, a prominent anti-apartheid campaigner and Jewish activist. Feinstein told the court that the group did not purposely target Jews, helping to counter the claim that Palestine Action was antisemitic in its motives.

The case will now proceed in closed sessions, where the government will present secret evidence to the five Supreme Court judges. During this stage, Ammori's legal team will not have direct access to the secret material. Instead, a special advocate appointed by the defense and granted security clearance will review the evidence and present arguments on their behalf.

The special advocate is prohibited from disclosing any details of the secret evidence to the main legal team. This procedural step ensures that sensitive information is protected while still allowing for a defense. The five judges will deliver their final judgment at a later date following the completion of these hearings.

This two-day hearing represents the final opportunity for Ammori to contest the ban in the UK courts. The ban took effect in February 2025 after Parliament ratified a decision by then Home Secretary Yvette Cooper. Since the ban was implemented, UK police have arrested more than 4,000 people under the Terrorism Act for defying the order and holding signs in support of the group.