Britain's highest court will hear a landmark challenge this week to the government's decision to ban Palestine Action under terrorism legislation, a case that continues to test the boundaries of British counterterror law, freedom of speech and the right to protest.
The appeal opens on Wednesday and is expected to last two days, with part of the proceedings set to be heard in secret because of the national security nature of some of the evidence. It comes amid mounting civil unrest and police crackdowns across Britain connected to the ban.
Over the weekend, police arrested hundreds of demonstrators outside the US embassy in London and in Edinburgh for holding placards that read "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action". Since the group was outlawed in 2025, the six-word statement has become a rallying cry and has led to 4,000 people facing arrest under Britain's Terrorism Act, among them human rights lawyers, elderly activists and Holocaust survivors.
The proscription has also fuelled questions about whether it breaches the right to free speech, after books by Irish novelist Sally Rooney were withdrawn from sale in the UK when she expressed support for the direct action group.
The legal battle was launched by Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori and has since moved through England's highest courts. The government banned the group in July 2025, criminalising membership and public support. In February 2026, the High Court handed campaigners a landmark victory, ruling the proscription unlawful and a disproportionate interference with human rights. The Court of Appeal overturned that decision in June 2026, restoring the terrorism designation, before Supreme Court justices granted Ammori permission for a final appeal in August 2026.
Over the two-day hearing, Ammori's lawyers will argue that using counterterrorism laws to designate a direct action group targeting arms suppliers sets a dangerous precedent that criminalises political dissent. In written submissions, her legal team noted that the Home Office assessed that less than one percent of Palestine Action's direct action protest activities over five years fell within a definition of terrorism. Raza Husain KC, for Ammori, said that only three out of 385 actions carried out by the group over a five-year period were assessed as meeting the definition of terrorism under part of the Terrorism Act.
Husain added that the ban has led to "the total destruction of a protest group which enjoyed widespread support from across civil society". Human rights groups and international observers, including UN special rapporteurs, also submitted written statements warning that the ban sets off a chilling effect across civil society.
The British government will defend its position before the justices, reminding the court that the Court of Appeal rejected Ammori's attempt to portray Palestine Action as a "non-violent direct action protest group". In written statements, James Eadie KC, the government's standing counsel, said the principles applied by the Court of Appeal in allowing the Secretary of State's appeal were "long-standing, settled, and orthodox", adding: "The Court of Appeal made no error of law. Their conclusions of fact were plainly justified on the evidence before them."
Jewish groups, including the Community Security Trust and the Jewish Leadership Council, submitted evidence in support of the ban, claiming the proscription protects Britain's Jewish community. Earlier this year, Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said the ban had inadvertently led to "grannies and vicars" being arrested for terror offences. "I don't think anyone's intent was to have those people criminalised," Miliband told LBC News. "But obviously the Supreme Court has got to look at this issue and obviously it's something we keep looking at as government."
