“The government tried to ban Britain’s most effective movement for the liberation of Palestinian people and instead they popularised it”.
Palestine Action spokesperson Lisa Minerva Luxx said that the case had so far cost the government nearly a million pounds, just “to persecute British people for having a moral compass at odds with their foreign interests, and to let them continue slaughtering Palestinian people in our name” – but that they have still failed. It came out in court, she said, that Yvette Cooper’s advisors had warned her if she proscribed Palestine Action within 6 months of the Filton trials it could be heavily prejudicial, and may put her in contempt of court. She went ahead anyway.
Thousands of people have risked the serious implications of a terrorist conviction in order to expose and defy the proscription of a non-violent direct action movement. Remember that in around 500 actions aimed at the weapons trade to Israel, there have only been allegations of violence on two or three occasions. Their labelling as terrorists has been almost entirely based on property damage designed to halt or interrupt the flow of weapons to Israel.
The jury in the recent Filton trial, after hearing all the circumstances surrounding the injury of a police officer, could not come to a conclusive verdict that an unlawful assault had occurred, as evidence emerged of security guards violently attacking activists, and police mistakenly discharging a taser a second time against a person already on the ground. This jury’s decision came despite a massive government and media campaign, using very selective video clips to demonise the defendants and influence the outcome, in what was undoubtedly a serious contempt of court. These clips and allegations were also publicised before the trial as part of the campaign to justify proscription.
When lawyers acting for Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori first called for a judicial review, Mr Justice Chamberlain agreed it could proceed on just two grounds – interference with Article 10 and 11 rights, and failure to consult and allow Palestine Action to make any representations itself. The government appealed his decision and lost to the extent that a further two grounds were admitted – first that the Home Secretary had failed to consider the extent to which much lawful activity is associated with the group and its mainstream public support, and second that she failed to follow her own published policy and didn’t follow the required steps in taking the decision.
On Friday, the High Court dismissed one of the original grounds and one of the new ones, ruling most importantly that the proscription infringed Article 10 and 11 rights, and that Yvette Cooper had not properly followed her own policies.
Tim Crosland, speaking on behalf of the Defend Our Juries organisation which co-ordinated the many Lift The Ban protests, said that the group have now called for a meeting with Shabana Mahmood (Home Secretary) and Mark Rowley (Met Police Commissioner) to look towards finding an alternative to the potentially thousands of claims of unlawful arrest. As well as damages for the violence of arrest and detention, there are reports of people losing jobs, and others not being able to travel to see loved ones, sometimes in hospital. On top of all these individual harms, there has been a terrible harm to democracy, when so many people have suffered for effectively peacefully protesting against government lawlessness. Defend Our Juries are suggesting an alternative process of “reparation, truth and reconciliation” for the injustices that have occurred “so that the fight against genocide and fascism, instead of dividing us, can unite us again”.
Despite jubilation amongst supporters on Friday, the proscription has not officially been lifted yet – the judgment proposes to “make an order quashing the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action”, but first there will be a “consequential hearing” next Friday 20th Feb, at which the claimant (PA’s co-founder Huda Ammori) will argue for immediate relief, while the Home Secretary will bid for proscription to remain in place pending a possible appeal.
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood took to social media within minutes of the judgment on Friday announcing her intention to apply for an appeal.
Referencing “unusual circumstances”, the Metropolitan Police also posted their plan – to continue collecting evidence against people showing support for Palestine Action, but not to immediately arrest them, pending further clarification.
We’ve had confirmation that at least some of the plea hearings scheduled at Westminster Crown Court have now been postponed, so the likelihood is that these are suspended pending further news too.
Craig Murray’s separate judicial review in Scotland was due to have a procedural hearing tomorrow, with a full hearing mid-March, but the government has asked for further time in order to prepare ‘closed evidence’, and we await a new timetable for that.
At the moment then, despite the celebrations in front of the High Court yesterday, Palestine Action’s status remains currently the same, while the risk associated with showing public support has become ambiguous, contrary to a basic principle of law requiring clarity.
Maybe when a government tries to defend the indefensible and square the circle, basic principles start to crumble too.
