UK Judge Rejects Draconian Terrorism Charges Against Palestine Solidarity Activists
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A Preston Crown Court judge has refused to impose terrorism sentences on five Palestine Action activists who targeted Barclays over its complicity in Israeli apartheid, with sentencing now set for September 4.
In a significant rebuke to the UK's increasingly authoritarian approach to protest, a Preston Crown Court judge ruled on Friday that five courageous members of Palestine Action, convicted of damaging a Barclays bank branch in Burnley, will not be sentenced under oppressive terrorism laws. The activists – Brendon O’Hagan, Amanda Kelly, Hmeera Atiqnisar, Mohammed Malik and Alma Yaniv – were found guilty in June of causing £212,000 in damage as part of a principled stand against Barclays’ shameful investment in Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems, a company complicit in the ongoing oppression of Palestinians.
Supporters, standing in solidarity outside the court, erupted in cheers as the ruling was announced, celebrating a rare victory for justice and the right to protest.
"It’s a victory for us, it’s a victory for Palestine, it’s a victory for protesting … We are on the right side of history," said Dove Malik, mother of defendant Mohammed Malik, echoing the sentiment of countless people resisting state violence and corporate profiteering.
The defendants, in a joint statement, expressed relief that the court had "seen sense and decided not to sentence us as terrorists," highlighting the absurdity of even considering such charges for direct action against war profiteers. They also noted the lack of transparency, as neither they nor the jury were warned about the possibility of a terrorism conviction.
The judge indicated he would still consider whether the offence had a "terrorist connection," a disturbing precedent previously set in another Palestine Action case at an Elbit Systems site near Bristol. Criminal lawyer Raj Chada pointed out that the use of terrorism-related provisions in protest cases is highly unusual and seems targeted at those standing up for Palestinian rights.
Human rights organizations have strongly condemned the government’s draconian decision to proscribe Palestine Action in July 2025, calling it a dangerous overreach. Amnesty International UK’s Kerry Moscogiuri demanded the proscription be lifted and an end to the weaponization of counter-terror laws against activists fighting for justice.