Government Pursues Legal Battle Against Decision Enabling Lawsuit Over Palestine Action's Ban

UK Court to Hear Appeal Against Proscription of Palestine Action in November

The legal battle between the Home Office and Palestine Action, a pro-Palestinian activist group, is set to continue as the Home Office has announced an appeal against a High Court ruling that allowed co-founder Huda Ammori to proceed with a legal challenge against the Government over the group's ban as a terror organisation.

The court case, scheduled for a three-day hearing in November, stems from an incident in June, where Palestine Action claimed responsibility for damaging two Voyager planes at RAF Brize Norton. This incident led to Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to ban the group.

The initial High Court ruling, made by Mr Justice Chamberlain on July 30, allowed Ammori to proceed with her legal challenge. The judge found that it is arguable that the proscription "amounts to a disproportionate interference" of Ammori's rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly.

However, the Home Office is defending the controversial decision to ban the group, with the new Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood representing the department in the legal dispute. Sir James Eadie KC, for the department, argued in July that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was "squarely" within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription.

Ammori, on the other hand, has expressed concern about the unforeseen consequences of the proscription and criticized Yvette Cooper for seeking to appeal the judge's ruling in her favour. She has also claimed that the decision has led to hundreds facing prosecution under the Terrorism Act, causing a chilling effect on freedom of speech.

In a court order last month, Lord Justice Underhill stated that Ammori's appeal has a real prospect of success. The Court of Appeal dismissed a bid to appeal against that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5.

Raza Husain KC, for Ammori, previously told the court that the ban had made the UK "an international outlier" and was "repugnant". He added that the decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.

The judge also considered it reasonably arguable that Cooper failed to consult Palestine Action "in breach of natural justice". Ammori's legal action was given the green light by Mr Justice Chamberlain in July, as he found two arguments put forward on her behalf to be "reasonably arguable."

However, the judge refused to allow Ammori to challenge the Government's decision on several other grounds, including a claim that the Home Secretary failed to gather sufficient information on Palestine Action's activities or the impact of the proscription on people associated with it.

The appeal is expected to be heard on September 25. Yvette Cooper announced plans to ban Palestine Action after the group claimed responsibility for the incident at RAF Brize Norton. The legal challenge is against Cooper's decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, making membership or support a criminal offense punishable by up to 14 years in prison.

Government Pursues Legal Battle Against Decision Enabling Lawsuit Over Palestine Action's Ban