Palestine Action wins court fight to challenge UK 'terror' ban
3 Min Read
The Court of Appeal has allowed Palestine Action to move forward with its legal challenge, marking a rare judicial setback for the Home Office.
-
Protesters in Parliament Square are watched by police during a protest to support Palestine Action in London, Saturday, Sept. 6, 2025 (AP)
A legal bid to overturn the UK government’s ban on the activist group Palestine Action will move forward next month after the Court of Appeal rejected the Home Office’s attempt to block the case.
On Friday, a panel of three judges led by the Lady Chief Justice, Sue Carr, upheld a previous High Court decision by Justice Chamberlain granting Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori permission to pursue a judicial review of the organization’s proscription under the Terrorism Act.
The ruling marks a significant setback for the Home Office, which had argued that the challenge should instead be heard by the Proscribed Organizations Appeal Commission (POAC), the body designated by Parliament for such cases.
Historic ban, mass arrests
The ban, which took effect on 5 July, made Palestine Action the first direct action campaign group to be outlawed under the Terrorism Act, placing it in the same category as proscribed entities such as Islamic State and National Action.
Since then, more than 2,000 people have reportedly been arrested under terrorism legislation for expressing support for the group, including demonstrators carrying signs reading: “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.”
In addition to dismissing the Home Office’s appeal, the Court of Appeal granted two extra grounds on which the legality of the proscription could be challenged, bringing the total to four. The judges agreed with Chamberlain that the High Court could address the matter more swiftly and provide clearer guidance on how to treat individuals facing criminal charges under the disputed ban.
The court also ruled that “the process for deproscribing [via the home secretary and then POAC if she refused] is not intended to remove the consequences of an initial, unlawful decision to proscribe an organisation,” and therefore, “an application for deproscription is not an alternative remedy to judicial review of a decision to proscribe.”
'A landmark victory'
Following the ruling, Ammori welcomed the outcome, describing it as a “landmark victory".
“The court of appeal has rightly rejected Yvette Cooper’s attempt to block a legal review of her absurdly authoritarian ban – while granting us additional grounds on which to challenge it,” she stressed.
“This is a landmark victory: not only against one of the most extreme attacks on civil liberties in recent British history, but for the fundamental principle that government ministers can and must be held accountable when they act unlawfully.”
Ammori added that “the government’s effort to avoid judicial scrutiny of its blatantly anti-democratic proscription, branding a protest group as ‘terrorists’ for the first time in British history, has backfired spectacularly,” asserting that Palestine Action now heads into its judicial review “with an even stronger legal footing.”
The judicial review is scheduled to begin on 25 November and will run for three days. It marks the first time that a group banned under the UK’s anti-terrorism laws has been granted a full court hearing to challenge its proscription.
Read more: West weaponizing laws to silence pro-Palestine activism: FIDH
