UK High Court overturns ban on Palestine Action under terrorism law

UK High Court overturns ban on Palestine Action under terrorism law
People protest outside the High Court, in London, Britain, 13 February, 2026
Reuters

The United Kingdom’s High Court has ruled that the government’s ban on the pro-Palestinian campaign group Palestine Action was unlawful, citing the disproportionate use of anti-terror legislation, but membership of and support for the group remain criminal offences.

Judges, led by Dame Victoria Sharp, said that although some of the group’s actions met the legal definition of terrorism, the scale and persistence of those activities did not justify proscription under the Terrorism Act 2000.

The ruling follows the group’s 2025 ban after activists targeted the UK subsidiary of Israel’s arms manufacturer, Elbit Systems, causing millions of pounds in damage.

The decision applies nationwide and comes amid ongoing debates over free speech, protest, and claims of government overreach.

Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori described the ruling as a “monumental victory” for fundamental freedoms in Britain. However, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the government disagreed with the court’s finding and intends to appeal.

Supporters of the group, including activists and human rights campaigners, welcomed the decision and described the arrests and prosecutions of thousands of protesters since the ban as “unjust”.

The court emphasised that general criminal law remains available to address acts of violence or property damage. The ban will remain temporarily in force until a further hearing later in February determines the next steps, including any potential appeal.

A protester holds a sign with a message against British Prime Minister Keir Starmer outside the High Court, London, Britain, 13 February, 2026
Reuters

The ruling prompted scenes of celebration outside the High Court in London, with chants in support of Palestinian rights.

Statements from campaign groups such as CAGE International and Defend Our Juries described the decision as a vindication of civil disobedience.

Tags