UK government lawyers use 'secret evidence' to justify ban on Palestine Action

The UK government closed the final day of the judicial review into Palestine Action by presenting secret evidence, hidden from both the group’s lawyers and the public, to justify its ban on the direct-action organisation.

Following brief open-court submissions from government lawyers on Tuesday, the court asked lawyers representing Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, as well as members of the public and journalists, to leave.

A portion of Tuesday’s hearing was held in closed session to allow the government to present material it says cannot be disclosed on national security grounds.

During these closed proceedings, known as closed material procedures (CMP), Ammori and her legal team replaced by a special advocate appointed by Ammori.

However, the special advocate is not permitted to share the government’s submissions with Ammori or her lawyers.

It means that if Ammori loses her case based on the secret evidence, neither she nor her team will know what the government argued against her or Palestine Action.

Tuesday’s hearing marked the conclusion of a three-day judicial review - the first of its kind granted to a group proscribed as a terrorist organisation.

Before the closed session, which lasted three hours, Stephen Kosmin, a lawyer representing the Home Office, defended the ban on Palestine Action, saying it was needed "to protect the public" and "maintain national security".

"There is concrete evidence of severe chilling effect of activity unrelated to Palestine Action"

- Raza Husain KC 

The government outlawed the group days after activists, protesting the war in Gaza, broke into an air force base in southern England and allegedly caused an estimated £7 million ($9.3 million) of damage to two aircraft.

In written court submissions, the Home Office argued that actions "can constitute terrorism if they involve serious property damage even if it does not involve violence against any person or endanger life".

"Proscribed organisations are deprived of the oxygen of publicity as well as financial support," the government submissions noted.

Meanwhile, the Home Office's lawyer Natasha Barnes argued the ban "has not prevented people from protesting in favour of the Palestinian people or against Israel's action in Gaza".

Chilling effect on Palestine protest

Following the closed session, Ammori's legal team returned to the court and criticised the government's ban, arguing that it did have a "chilling effect" on Palestinian activism in the UK.

Raza Hussain KC said the ban has led to house raids, protest injunctions, workplace disciplinary measures, workplace suspensions, and frozen bank accounts.

"There is concrete evidence of severe chilling effect of activity unrelated to Palestine Action," Husain said in open court, referring to a witness statement provided to them by the European Legal Support Centre (ELSC).

Since the ban on Palestine, hundreds of people across the UK have faced arrest for opposing the ban on the direct-action group and holding a sign that read: "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action."

Defend Our Juries, which has organised protests against the ban on Palestine Action, held a month-long series of protests in 18 towns and cities across the UK.

Palestine Action prisoner hospitalised due to hunger strike

Read More »

The month of protests culminated in a protest outside the Royal Courts of Justice last Wednesday, on the first day of the judicial review, resulting in approximately 140 arrests.

Ammori's legal team said Palestine Action modelled itself on Britain's "long tradition of direct action," citing the suffragettes as its inspiration.

"The Suffragettes would have been liable to proscription if the regime had been in force at the turn of the 20th century," Husain said in written submissions. 

The court also heard submissions from UN special rapporteurs who said the UK had become an "international outlier" by choosing to ban Palestine Action.

"There is also a consensus, or emerging consensus, that the definition of terrorism does not extend to serious damage to property," said Adam Straw KC, speaking on behalf of UN Special Rapporteur Ben Saul.

The court also heard a witness statement from Irish novelist Sally Rooney, who said the ban on Palestine Action could stop her receiving royalties and lead to her books being withdrawn from sale due to her support for the group. 

Rooney highlighted how the production company Element Pictures had expressed concern that paying her royalties from adaptations of her novels could be a crime. 

She also said in her statement submitted to London's High Court that the law was unclear on whether her publishers, Faber & Faber, could pay her royalties on book sales, meaning "my existing works may have to be withdrawn from sale" in Britain.

"The disappearance of my work from bookshops would mark a truly extreme incursion by the state into the realm of artistic expression," she said in the statement.

The court was not told when a judgement would be handed down.