Hundreds sign letter opposing ban on Palestine Action, calling it ‘major assault on freedoms’

Police officers try to stop demonstrators from linking arms, during a protest calling for the de-proscription of the Palestine Action group, at St. Peter’s Square in Manchester, Britain, July 12, 2025. (Reuters)
Short Url
Updated 13 July 2025
Follow

Hundreds sign letter opposing ban on Palestine Action, calling it ‘major assault on freedoms’

  • Palestine Action, known for its direct action protests targeting UK-based Israeli weapons factories and their supply chains, was officially proscribed under anti-terrorism laws

LONDON: Hundreds of trade unionists, activists, politicians and campaigners have signed an open letter condemning the UK government’s recent decision to ban the protest group Palestine Action, describing the move as “a major assault on our freedoms.”

Palestine Action, known for its direct action protests targeting UK-based Israeli weapons factories and their supply chains, was officially proscribed under anti-terrorism laws earlier this month after a parliamentary vote.

The ban makes it a criminal offence to be a member of or express support for the group. A last-minute legal challenge to halt the proscription was unsuccessful.

“Peaceful protest tactics which damage property or disrupt ‘business-as-usual’ in order to call attention to the crimes of the powerful have a long and proud history. They are more urgent than ever in response to Israel’s genocide against the Palestinian people,” the open letter, which has gathered more than 900 signatures so far, argued. 

Among the signatories are singer Charlotte Church and long-time environmental and human rights activist Angie Zelter, who was previously acquitted after disarming a BAE Hawk jet and destroying infrastructure linked to Britain’s Trident nuclear weapons system, The Guardian newspaper reported.

Elected representatives also joined the list of supporters, including James Dornan, Scottish National Party MSP for Cathcart, who last week tabled a motion in the Scottish parliament calling for the Israeli military to be designated a terrorist organization.

Glasgow Trades Union Council, which is collectively backing the letter, issued a statement saying: “As the UK government is attacking our civil liberties, we must ask ourselves if not now, then when?”

Anne Alexander, a University of Cambridge researcher and UCU activist who helped organize the letter, said the response showed widespread opposition to the government's stance.

“The response to this open letter shows that people up and down the country want to stop arms going to Israel and that they don’t agree that a direct action group are ‘terrorists’ because they tried to disrupt the supply chain fuelling a genocide,” she said.

The draft order to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000 was put forward by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and passed the House of Commons on July 2 by 385 votes to 26.

The legislation included a ban on two neo-Nazi organisations, the Maniacs Murder Cult and the Russian Imperial Movement.

Some MPs and human rights groups have been critical of the government for the move, suggesting that combining Palestine Action with white supremacist groups in a single motion placed political pressure on MPs to support the measure.


Trump sues the BBC for defamation over editing of January 6 speech, seeks up to $10 billion in damages

Updated 8 sec ago
Follow

Trump sues the BBC for defamation over editing of January 6 speech, seeks up to $10 billion in damages

  • A BBC spokesperson told Reuters earlier on Monday that it had “no further contact from President Trump’s lawyers at this point
  • The BBC is funded through a mandatory license fee on all TV viewers, which UK lawyers say could make any payout to Trump politically fraught

WASHING: President Donald Trump sued the BBC on Monday for defamation over edited clips of a speech that made it appear he directed supporters to storm the US Capitol, opening an international front in his fight against media coverage he deems untrue or unfair. Trump accused Britain’s publicly owned broadcaster of defaming him by splicing together parts of a January 6, 2021 speech, including one section where he told supporters to march on the Capitol and another where he said “fight like hell.” It omitted a section in which he called for peaceful protest.
Trump’s lawsuit alleges the BBC defamed him and violated a Florida law that bars deceptive and unfair trade practices. He is seeking $5 billion in damages for each of the lawsuit’s two counts. The BBC has apologized to Trump, admitted an error of judgment and acknowledged that the edit gave the mistaken impression that he had made a direct call for violent action. But it has said there is no legal basis to sue.
Trump, in his lawsuit filed Monday in Miami federal court, said the BBC despite its apology “has made no showing of actual remorse for its wrongdoing nor meaningful institutional changes to prevent future journalistic abuses.”
The BBC is funded through a mandatory license fee on all TV viewers, which UK lawyers say could make any payout to Trump politically fraught.
A spokesman for Trump’s legal team said in a statement the BBC “has a long pattern of deceiving its audience in coverage of President Trump, all in service of its own leftist political agenda.”
A BBC spokesperson told Reuters earlier on Monday that it had “no further contact from President Trump’s lawyers at this point. Our position remains the same.” The broadcaster did not immediately respond to a request for comment after the lawsuit was filed.

CRISIS LED TO RESIGNATIONS
Facing one of the biggest crises in its 103-year history, the BBC has said it has no plans to rebroadcast the documentary on any of its platforms.
The dispute over the clip, featured on the BBC’s “Panorama” documentary show shortly before the 2024 presidential election, sparked a public relations crisis for the broadcaster, leading to the resignations of its two most senior officials.
Trump’s lawyers say the BBC caused him overwhelming reputational and financial harm.
The documentary drew scrutiny after the leak of a BBC memo by an external standards adviser that raised concerns about how it was edited, part of a wider investigation of political bias at the publicly funded broadcaster.
The documentary was not broadcast in the United States.
Trump may have sued in the US because defamation claims in Britain must be brought within a year of publication, a window that has closed for the “Panorama” episode.
To overcome the US Constitution’s legal protections for free speech and the press, Trump will need to prove not only that the edit was false and defamatory but also that the BBC knowingly misled viewers or acted recklessly.
The broadcaster could argue that the documentary was substantially true and its editing decisions did not create a false impression, legal experts said. It could also claim the program did not damage Trump’s reputation.
Other media have settled with Trump, including CBS and ABC when Trump sued them following his comeback win in the November 2024 election.
Trump has filed lawsuits against the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal and a newspaper in Iowa, all three of which have denied wrongdoing. The attack on the US Capitol in January 2021 was aimed at blocking Congress from certifying Joe Biden’s presidential win over Trump in the 2020 US election.