What happened
Report Provider: The Telegraph
Author: David Shipley
Publication Date: July 31, 2025
At the Royal Courts of Justice I couldn’t believe my ears. The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, was handing down his decision as to whether Palestine Action (PA) should be allowed to challenge the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe them. Chamberlain explained one of the eight “grounds” under which the group were seeking a judicial review.
While Chamberlain dismissed six of the grounds, he accepted PA’s claim that their Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of association) rights and those of their supporters could have been violated.We should, I suppose, be grateful that he dismissed Palestine Action’s claim the Home Secretary might have breached her obligations under the Equality Act.
The judicial review is likely to be heard this autumn. What does this all mean? Despite the Home Secretary ordering PA to be proscribed, despite Parliament voting for that proscription order, and and despite the group’s actions being so violent and disruptive, a judge has decided that a proscribed terrorist organisation is entitled to a judicial review.
This is because their rights to expression and association may be violated, and they weren’t “consulted” by the Home Secretary.PA is not a peaceful protest group. They attacked a Thales factory in Glasgow in 2022, and sites operated by other companies in Kent and Bristol last year. Then, last month, PA shared a video which appeared to show their activists breaking into RAF Brize Norton and damaging the engines of military planes.
Two men have been charged following that incident.This is all very far from peaceful protest, or the rights to free expression which the ECHR is supposed to protect. Is it reasonable to demand that the Home Secretary consults with any terrorist group she might seek to ban? Do terrorists have the right to free expression and assembly?
I didn’t think so, but Lord Justice Chamberlain has ruled that these points are “arguable”.Perhaps the judicial review in the autumn will succeed. What might that mean? PA’s protests and terrorist actions may well continue. And what of the other 83 proscribed terrorist groups? How many of them feel that their rights to expression and assembly have been violated by their proscription?
That being said, through all of this is the smell of two-tier Keir’s Britain.Earlier this week the Prime Minister indicated that he may recognise Palestine as a state. PA’s cause is very popular in certain circles. It’s a bizarre nation we live in; we are ruled by lawyers and judges. A culture of “rights” and “consultation” has reached its logical, ridiculous conclusion.
You might think that the entire purpose of banning a terrorist group is to prevent their expression and assembly, and that the idea of consulting them in advance is utterly laughable. But it seems the judiciary does not agree. It’s unclear what this means for those many supporters of Palestine Action who have been arrested since their proscription earlier this month.
The Home Secretary, however, is resolute in her decision to ban PA. She says that “the decision to proscribe was based on strong security advice and the unanimous recommendation by the expert cross-government Proscription Review Group.”She goes on to warn that “those who seek to support this group may yet not know the true nature of the organisation.
” It does seem, though, that the levers of state power do not work. If an order by a holder of one of the Great Offices of State and a subsequent vote by Parliament mean nothing, how can this country be governed? If those who hold democratic legitimacy are prevented from governing, then how are we ever supposed to overcome the many great threats facing our country?
It seems that Britain is increasingly ungovernable, and it is very hard to see how we go on like this. The Government can’t pass benefits reforms, can’t “smash the gangs” and it now seems it can’t even proscribe an organisation which appears to have committed acts of terrorism. Unless something changes the next four years will be disastrous.
Source coverage
Report Provider: The Telegraph
Author: David Shipley
Deeper analysis
Full source content
At the Royal Courts of Justice I couldn’t believe my ears. The judge, Mr Justice Chamberlain, was handing down his decision as to whether Palestine Action (PA) should be allowed to challenge the Home Secretary’s decision to proscribe them. Chamberlain explained one of the eight “grounds” under which the group were seeking a judicial review.
While Chamberlain dismissed six of the grounds, he accepted PA’s claim that their Article 10 (freedom of expression) and Article 11 (freedom of association) rights and those of their supporters could have been violated.We should, I suppose, be grateful that he dismissed Palestine Action’s claim the Home Secretary might have breached her obligations under the Equality Act.
The judicial review is likely to be heard this autumn. What does this all mean? Despite the Home Secretary ordering PA to be proscribed, despite Parliament voting for that proscription order, and and despite the group’s actions being so violent and disruptive, a judge has decided that a proscribed terrorist organisation is entitled to a judicial review.
This is because their rights to expression and association may be violated, and they weren’t “consulted” by the Home Secretary.PA is not a peaceful protest group. They attacked a Thales factory in Glasgow in 2022, and sites operated by other companies in Kent and Bristol last year. Then, last month, PA shared a video which appeared to show their activists breaking into RAF Brize Norton and damaging the engines of military planes.
Two men have been charged following that incident.This is all very far from peaceful protest, or the rights to free expression which the ECHR is supposed to protect. Is it reasonable to demand that the Home Secretary consults with any terrorist group she might seek to ban? Do terrorists have the right to free expression and assembly?
I didn’t think so, but Lord Justice Chamberlain has ruled that these points are “arguable”.Perhaps the judicial review in the autumn will succeed. What might that mean? PA’s protests and terrorist actions may well continue. And what of the other 83 proscribed terrorist groups? How many of them feel that their rights to expression and assembly have been violated by their proscription?
That being said, through all of this is the smell of two-tier Keir’s Britain.Earlier this week the Prime Minister indicated that he may recognise Palestine as a state. PA’s cause is very popular in certain circles. It’s a bizarre nation we live in; we are ruled by lawyers and judges. A culture of “rights” and “consultation” has reached its logical, ridiculous conclusion.
You might think that the entire purpose of banning a terrorist group is to prevent their expression and assembly, and that the idea of consulting them in advance is utterly laughable. But it seems the judiciary does not agree. It’s unclear what this means for those many supporters of Palestine Action who have been arrested since their proscription earlier this month.
The Home Secretary, however, is resolute in her decision to ban PA. She says that “the decision to proscribe was based on strong security advice and the unanimous recommendation by the expert cross-government Proscription Review Group.”She goes on to warn that “those who seek to support this group may yet not know the true nature of the organisation.
” It does seem, though, that the levers of state power do not work. If an order by a holder of one of the Great Offices of State and a subsequent vote by Parliament mean nothing, how can this country be governed? If those who hold democratic legitimacy are prevented from governing, then how are we ever supposed to overcome the many great threats facing our country?
It seems that Britain is increasingly ungovernable, and it is very hard to see how we go on like this. The Government can’t pass benefits reforms, can’t “smash the gangs” and it now seems it can’t even proscribe an organisation which appears to have committed acts of terrorism. Unless something changes the next four years will be disastrous.
How this page is built
Goose Pod turns cited reporting into a public episode summary first, then pairs that summary with audio playback so listeners can check the source material before they decide how deeply to engage.
The goal is to make this page useful as a news landing page first, while still giving listeners transcript access, related episodes, and direct links back to the original publishers.
