London, UK – August 18,2025
UK’s controversial ban continues to send shockwaves through activist circles as the Metropolitan Police announced that at least 60 more individuals will face prosecution for showing support for the recently proscribed group, Palestine Action. The move comes as part of a significant police operation targeting those who have defied the government’s classification of the group as a terrorist organisation. This latest round of prosecutions adds to three individuals already charged, bringing the total number of people facing criminal proceedings to at least 63. The escalating number of arrests and charges has ignited fierce debate about the balance between national security and the right to protest.
The UK government officially proscribed Palestine Action on July 7, 2025, a decision that has been met with widespread criticism from civil liberties groups, including the United Nations, Amnesty International, and Greenpeace. Critics argue that the ban is an excessive use of legal power and a dangerous precedent that could stifle legitimate dissent. The proscription makes it a criminal offence to be a member of or to invite support for the group, with a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison for membership, and up to six months for lesser offences such as displaying placards in support of the group.
The Metropolitan Police stated that the latest prosecutions stem from mass demonstrations, including a protest in central London last weekend where 522 people were arrested for displaying signs backing the group. This figure is believed to be the highest number of arrests at a single protest in the capital’s history, highlighting the scale of the police response. Director of Public Prosecutions Stephen Parkinson noted that the current wave of charges is only the beginning, with many more expected in the coming weeks. “People should be clear about the real-life consequences for anyone choosing to support Palestine Action,” he said in a statement.
The government, however, remains resolute in its position. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has repeatedly defended the ban, insisting that Palestine Action’s activities, which have included aggressive and intimidatory attacks on businesses, have “crossed the thresholds established in the Terrorism Act 2000.” She maintains that the proscription does not interfere with the right to protest in support of the Palestinian cause, and only targets a specific organisation that has engaged in what she describes as “serious attacks” resulting in “significant injuries and extensive criminal damage.”
However, the ban’s critics, including prominent figures and organisations, see it as an attempt to suppress activism that challenges UK foreign policy. They contend that the group’s actions, while sometimes disruptive, fall under the umbrella of civil disobedience and should not be equated with terrorism. The case has also been granted permission for a judicial review, with a judge acknowledging that the proscription is “likely to have a significant deterrent effect on legitimate speech.” The legal challenge and the continued, high-profile arrests suggest that this controversy is far from over, and will continue to be a focal point in the national conversation about free speech and protest rights.
Headline Points
* Controversial Proscription: The UK government’s classification of Palestine Action as a terrorist group continues to be met with widespread criticism.
* Mounting Prosecutions: 60 more individuals are to be prosecuted for showing support for the banned group, adding to an initial three charged.
* Mass Arrests: The move follows a protest where 522 people were arrested for displaying signs backing Palestine Action, marking a historic number of arrests for a single demonstration in London.
* Government’s Stance: The Home Secretary defends the ban, stating that the group’s activities constitute “terrorism” and have crossed legal thresholds.
* Critics’ Concerns: Civil liberties groups and activists argue the ban is an overreach of power that threatens free speech and the right to protest.
* Ongoing Legal Battle: The proscription is facing a judicial review, raising questions about its legality and impact on legitimate dissent.
