Scotland legal battle over banning Palestine Action group

Scotland faces a legal battle as authorities attempt to ban Palestine Action, a group the government labels a terrorist organization. While the main fight occurs in London, similar conflicts are unfolding in Edinburgh and across the Scottish legal system. Just one year ago, seventy-year-old Cathy Allen displayed a placard supporting Palestine Action during a protest in Edinburgh. That July 19 demonstration marked the first Scottish civil disobedience campaign organized by Defend Our Juries against the group's proscription. Police detained Allen a few days later, making her among the first individuals in Scotland arrested for associating with a banned group. She expressed deep horror at the situation in Gaza and argued that restricting the right to protest genocide represents an unacceptable overreach by the state. Allen and Justin Kenrick now prepare to argue before Scotland's High Court that their arrests violate fundamental rights to free expression and assembly. They hope a favorable ruling will set a crucial precedent for future cases within Scotland and influence legal outcomes in England and Wales. Recent data obtained by investigative outlet The Detail reveals 103 terrorism charges linked to Palestine Action. These cases represent more than half of all 193 terrorism charges filed in Scotland since the Terrorism Act began in 2000. Although specific case outcomes remain undisclosed, Catherine Smith KC, the advocate general for Scotland, confirmed that 54 prosecutions remain active. Defend Our Juries reports that 24 people currently face charges for holding signs like Allen's, while 16 others confront similar legal trouble for wearing shirts stating, "Genocide in Palestine. Time to take Action." Marie, a member of the Gaza Genocide Emergency Committee Scotland, criticized the ban as an abuse of power that arrests citizens for simple clothing choices. Across the entire United Kingdom, more than 3,300 people have been arrested since the July 2025 ban took effect. This direct action group targets sites connected to Israel's military operations. Of those arrested, over 1,200 individuals now face terror-related charges, a move many legal experts and rights groups describe as illiberal overreach. As Palestine Action continues its legal fight in London courts, the implications for local communities remain significant and uncertain.

Activists associated with the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign were imprisoned on terrorism charges following convictions for criminal offenses, a development that has instilled significant confusion and anxiety within the local community. The imposition of a proscription order has created an environment where legal consequences for protest actions remain uncertain, leaving citizens hesitant to engage in lawful demonstrations.

Mick Napier, a spokesperson for the campaign and one of those currently facing terrorism charges, highlighted the severe personal and professional repercussions of such designations. He noted that individuals charged with terrorism face substantial obstacles regarding international travel and are often barred from employment in critical sectors such as medicine and teaching due to mandatory disclosure requirements. Furthermore, the scarcity of legal relief is evident, as only a single individual in Scotland has thus far seen their terrorism charges dismissed.

Police Scotland maintained that enforcement would proceed proportionately, citing a court ruling that the proscription order remains valid. However, the legal battle over the ban continues to unfold through multiple judicial avenues. Following last year's initial ban, cofounder Huda Ammori successfully appealed to the High Court, which declared the order unlawful in February. The United Kingdom is now contesting this decision in the Court of Appeal, with a verdict anticipated this Monday. Meanwhile, a parallel judicial review initiated by former diplomat Craig Murray was granted permission in January but subsequently paused in May to await the resolution of the Ammori case, a move attributed to the direct intervention of a UK government minister.

Legal representatives and campaign organizers argue that the current regulatory framework fails to strike a fair balance between national security and the preservation of free expression. Joanna Cherry KC, representing Craig Murray, described the proscription's effect as "chilling," asserting that the government has not adequately protected the right to speech while attempting to prevent terrorism. Helen Gourlay of the Scottish Palestine Solidarity Campaign echoed these sentiments, stating that the ban infringes upon fundamental human rights and that the state appears complicit in the ongoing conflict. She emphasized that the declaration of genocide necessitates opposition, even if it risks prosecution under counterterrorism legislation.

While Napier expressed hope that the Court of Appeal will rule in favor of Ammori, he acknowledged the possibility of further government appeals and reaffirmed the group's commitment to continued campaigning. Concurrently, protests targeting the arms trade have persisted, with activists directing attention toward facilities in Edinburgh, including those belonging to Keysight Technologies and Leonardo. The Campaign Against Arms Trade reports that the Leonardo site manufactures laser targeting systems for the F-35 combat aircraft utilized by Israel. Despite the Scottish Parliament's recognition of the genocide and its vote to boycott Israel, the specific actions taken by the Scottish Government to honor these declarations remain unclear. Defend Our Juries has called on Holyrood to clarify its stance, urging that the Scottish Government ensure peaceful protesters are not prosecuted under counterterrorism laws it possesses the moral authority to challenge.