Irish Fenian to Direct Actionists

By Seamus Wagner

British Terrorism Laws’ Oppressive Prosecution Did Not Start With Palestine Action.

Since July 5th, it has been a crime to state “I support Palestine Action” or any similar expression of support or sympathy for the organisation [1]. Offenders – of which there are hundreds – could face up to six months in prison, and members of the organisation will face up to 14 years in prison [2]. Many have, with good reason, condemned the proscription of Palestine Action as an “abuse of power”, with the vast majority of the group’s actions found to be legal and, failing that, in line with contemporary and historical protest groups [3]. Those groups include the Suffragettes, and the likes of Just Stop Oil or, Youth Demand. This has done little to dissuade Home Secretary Yvette Cooper from proscribing Palestine Action. It seems that if you are too effective in your activism, or threaten the profits of the government’s friends and financial backers in the arms industry, you will be faced with the full brunt of UK terrorism law [4] . In fact, it seems all you have to do is be pro-Palestinian. One protester in Kent was threatened with 14 years in prison for so much as holding a Palestinian flag, saying “Free Gaza”, and stating that Israel is committing a genocide [5]. I wonder if the government will exercise the same level of scrutiny on the far-right agitators who attempted to massacre migrants by the dozens last summer and who, recently, threw a bomb into the Belfast Islamic Centre [6] . For some reason, I don’t believe they will.

Yet, the story of British authorities using terrorism law to crack down on unwanted dissent is not new. To anyone aware of the history of anti-terrorism law within the UK, it’s a tale as old as the laws themselves. If anything, it goes as far as the very definition of terrorism. Or, more specifically, the lack of a coherent one. The Terrorism Act of 2000 defines terrorism as “The use or threat of serious violence against a person or serious damage to property where that action is: designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public; and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.” It is this definition that has seen Palestine Action deemed a terrorism group. Yet, when looking at that definition, it far more accurately describes the actions of Israel in it’s genocide of the Palestinians than anything Palestine Action has done. It would be more apt to use this definition regarding the 1st Battalion of the Parachute Regiment on Bloody Sunday than any direct actionist. This, of course, is irrelevant to the British government, as both the Israeli government and Bloody Sunday killers are aligned with the UK’s interests,and Palestine Action is not.

Terrorism law within the UK, rather than being created to prevent acts of political violence, has been made, instead, to target groups and movements the British government finds inconvenient. Britain’s first anti-terrorism laws, the Prevention of Terrorism Acts, were in response to the IRA and its activities. Similar scrutiny to unionist paramilitaries was lacking. It took until 1992 for the UDA to be proscribed, afterall [7]. Yet, even in this repressive period, these laws were seen as extreme, temporary measures. The Home Secretary at the time went so far as to describe them as “draconian”, and while the law expanded more and more, it remained, at least legally, an emergency measure that required annual renewal [8]. These laws were then used to justify and support policies such as internment without trial, with countless innocent people thrown into jail without due process for years on end. Something not dissimilar from the experience of the Filton 18, whose conditions are bleak enough for the UN to formally condemn them, and who are, as of writing, yet to see trial. They, as members of Palestine Action, join the likes of Nelson Mandela and the ANC as being defined by the British government as terrorists. This was due to their armed campaign against the Apartheid state of South Africa, one deeply aligned with its fellow Apartheid state of Israel, and one the British government had close ties to. It would take decades for Mandela to lose his designation as a terrorist; who knows how long it will be for Palestine Action. After decades of internment without trial, large-scale abuse of powers, and a growing surveillance state, those “draconian” terrorism laws were officially made permanent under 2000’s Terrorism Act [9].

In short, it provided wider-ranging, easier-to-exploit powers to police and prosecutors who had already had access to wide-ranging and easy-to-exploit powers. It has, just like its predecessors, caused immense suffering to the innocent and unguilty in the name of the British government’s interests, and has done
relatively little to stop actual terrorism. At the very least, it has done nothing to stop terrorism that the British government approves of, such as Israel’s genocide in Gaza. Now, with Palestine Action to be under the same designation as ISIS and National Action, it’s only more clear that words of the Home Secretary in
1974 are still accurate to describe counter-terrorism law. Law which has little to do with terrorism and much more to do with crushing dissent and opposition.

Palestine Action’s proscription is an example of something deeply wrong with the British state and its approach to dissent. An approach which has ruined and taken lives while allowing terrorists to continue to organise and kill as they please. An approach which, as seen with Palestine Action, can allow protest groups to be labelled as terrorists. It is an approach which must be done away with, and one that, if it is not, will only worsen the UK’s backslide into authoritarianism.

References

1. James, I. and Price, E. (2025b) ‘Government to ban Palestine Action, home secretary confirms,’ BBC
   News, 23 June. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4g83l33wdeo. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
2. Al-Jazeera. (2025) ‘Protests held across UK supporting banned Palestine Action despite arrests,’ Al
   Jazeera, 19 July. 9ibid8 H.C. Debs. col. 35 25 November 1974, Mr. Jenkins
   7 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8442746.stm
   https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/7/19/protests-across-uk-supporting-banned-group-palestine-actiondespite-arrests. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
3. Siddique, H. (2025) ‘UK ban on Palestine Action is an abuse of power, high court told,’ The Guardian,
   24 July.
   https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jul/21/uk-ban-on-palestine-action-is-an-abuse-of-power-high-c
   ourt-told. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
4. World Peace Foundation (2024) Path-breaking new report on UK arms industry influence on
   government policy – World Peace Foundation.
   https://worldpeacefoundation.org/blog/path-breaking-new-report-on-uk-arms-industry-influence-on-gover
   nment-policy/. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
5. Rickett, O. (2025) ‘UK armed police threat to pro-Palestine protester branded ‘dystopian,’’ Middle East
   Eye, 18 July.
   https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uk-police-threat-pro-palestine-protester-branded-dystopian.
   (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
6. Graham, C. (2025) ‘Islamic Centre attack: Belfast man in court on various charges,’ BBC, 23 June.
   https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvg8e439dyeo. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
7. Glossary of terms (2024).
   https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/prevent-duty-guidance/glossary-of-terms#terrorism
   (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
8. BBC (2011) ‘BBC News – A history of the UDA,’ BBC, 6 September.
   http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8442746.stm. (Accessed: July 22, 2025).
9. H.C. Debs. col. 35 25 November 1974, Mr. Jenkins
10. Hearst, K. (2025) ‘UN experts intervene over harsh detention conditions in Palestine Action case,’
    Middle East Eye, 29 January.
    https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/un-experts-intervene-filton-18-palestine-action-case.
11. H.C. Debs. col. 35 25 November 1974, Mr. Jenkins