The Palestine Action ban represents an unprecedented and disproportionate restriction on the right to protest, the UK high court was told on the opening day of a legal challenge led by co-founder Huda Ammori.

Her lawyer, Raza Husain KC, said the group was engaged in an “honourable tradition” of direct action and civil disobedience before being proscribed.

“There are reasons of profound importance as to why, in the 32 executive orders that have been made adding organisations to proscribed lists, no direct action civil disobedience organisation appears," Husain told the court.

He argued that proscribing Palestine Action was “repugnant to the tradition of the common law and contrary to the European convention on human rights.”

Read more: Leaked UK intel exposes flawed ban on Palestine Action

Group accused of civil disobedience, not terrorism

Husain said UK Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood alleged that a few actions by the group crossed the threshold into terrorism, but insisted these were disputed and rare.

In written submissions, he cited a September 2024 report by the National Police Coordination Centre, which concluded the group posed a risk to UK businesses but was engaged in “non-violent direct action.”

A later report from December 2024 stated that incidents involving violence were “not the norm for PA (Palestine Action) action, and any harm or injuries historically are assessed to be the result of unintentional or misjudged action through trying to evade capture.”

Husain added that only four out of hundreds of actions could potentially meet the definition of serious property damage.

Read more: Knesset advances bill allowing Israelis to 'own property' in West Bank

Government justifies proscription over alleged escalation

Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Home Secretary, defended the ban, stating it had successfully disrupted “PA’s pattern of escalatory conduct” without stopping people from supporting Palestine or opposing “Israel’s” actions in Gaza.

“Even if the proscription of PA did interfere with individuals’ article 9, 10 and 11 rights, the proscription of PA was and remains proportionate,” Eadie said.

He asserted that some actions taken by the group met the legal definition of terrorism and that the Home Secretary acted within the framework authorized by parliament.

Debate over scope of freedom of protest rights

The legal outcome is expected to impact over 2,000 people arrested for allegedly supporting Palestine Action, mostly for carrying placards reading: “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.”

At least five individuals holding such signs were detained outside the court during Wednesday’s proceedings.

Supporters argue the ban undermines freedom of protest and targets solidarity with Palestine during a time of increased public dissent against UK arms sales and support for "Israel."

Hunger strike draws attention to detained activists

As court proceedings began, the health of imprisoned Palestine Action members on hunger strike drew growing concern.

Kamran Ahmed, detained at HMP Pentonville for over a year and awaiting trial, joined the rolling hunger strike on 10 November. He was hospitalized after losing 6kg and experiencing dizziness, chest pain, and dangerously high ketone levels.

His sister, Shamina Amal, said, “I am disgusted that the government has chosen to ignore the hunger strikers with no care or consideration to their sanctity of their health and lives.”

More than 100 medical doctors signed a letter urging NHS England’s health and justice division to intervene and ensure proper care for the strikers.

The hearing is expected to conclude next week, with a ruling on the legality of the proscription order to follow.

Read more: Elbit Systems shuts down UK site targeted by Palestine Action