UK mass crackdown on Palestine activism has brought chaos to the courts
Protesters hold placards at a demonstration against the British government’s ban on Palestine Action, at Trafalgar Square in London on 4 October 2025
John Rees reports in Middle East Eye on 3 April 2026:
The conviction of two leaders of the Palestine solidarity movement, Chris Nineham, the vice-chair of the Stop the War Coalition, and Ben Jamal, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, for breaching police conditions as organisers of a peaceful Palestine protest has been widely seen as a direct assault on the right to protest.
But it’s far from the only case of its kind. In fact state overreach is causing confusion in the UK court system, as it struggles to cope with hundreds of cases brought under the Public Order Act and anti-terrorism legislation.
The tsunami is the result of a wave of demonstrators being charged with offences linked to their participation in pro-Palestine protests since October 2023, compounded by the proscription of Palestine Action last year.
In some cases, courts are simply refusing to convict. A number of pro-Palestinian activists have been found not guilty, either fully or on key charges. Other cases have been dismissed or ruled unlawful.
In the Filton Six case, concerning a 2024 break-in by Palestine Action activists at an Elbit Systems factory, the defendants were found not guilty of aggravated burglary, the most serious charge they faced. The jury failed to reach a verdict on other charges. As a result, prosecutors later dropped the same burglary charge against 18 related defendants.
Last month, the government lost its appeal against the dismissal of a terrorism charge against Mo Chara of the Irish rap group Kneecap for allegedly displaying a Hezbollah flag at a concert. The charge was originally ruled “unlawful” and “null”. On appeal, the court agreed that the charge had been brought outside of the six-month time limit.
Then, in a crown court in Bristol, a jury found a pro-Palestine activist not guilty of supporting Hamas in a speech she gave at a demonstration in Cardiff. In legal directions before the jury retired to consider the verdict, the judge said they had to be sure that the defendant’s comments were “objectively supportive of Hamas”. The jury decided that this was not the case.
Potentially most seriously of all, the High Court ruled illegal the government’s decision to ban Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act. The government is contesting this decision, so the legality of the ban still lies in the balance.