Judge allows Palestine Action to challenge Home Office over terrorism ban
The banned group has decided on Palestinian action, a judge, and the court will be able to challenge the court on the prohibition as a terrorist organization.
Huda Ammori, the founding partner of the pro -Palestinian action group, tried to challenge the government’s decision to prohibit according to the fight against terrorism laws.
Interior Minister Yette Cooper decided to ban the group after entering the Raf Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and spraying red paint on two military planes.
In addition, in 2022, the group referred to a protest at a Glasgow’s protest in Glasgow, which caused damage to 1 million pounds and caused a defense technology company to target Elbit Systems UK.
The forbidden entered into force in early July and made a criminal offense supporting the Palestinian action, and supported the group, which could be sentenced to membership or imprisonment of up to 14 years.
In his decision on Wednesday, Justice Chamberlain said that the reports that pro -Palestinian protesters who did not support the Palestinian action have been arrested were “a creepy effect on those who want to express legitimate political views”. He said that this was a “indirect consequence of the forbidden order.
In a recent case, a man was arrested for holding a special eye cartoon in a demonstration in Leeds within the scope of the Law of Terrorism.
Authority, “Ms Ammori’nin freedom of expression and assembly freedom rights” a “disproportionate intervention” means “quite indisputable”, he added.
As the government suggested, Chamberlain said it would be better to allow a judicial examination against the prohibition of the Ministry of Interior, as it would be faster than referring the case to an order -made court.
He also said that one of the arguments that will continue to have complete legal difficulties was whether the Minister of the Interior had to consult and consult the Palestinian action before banning the group. He said: “It was reasonable that the counseling task was revealed and that it was reasonable that there was no compelling reason for the inability to make the consultation here.”
More than 80 organizations have already been banned within the scope of 2000 terrorism law, including Al Qaeda and Wagner Group.
The prohibition of Britain’s Palestinian action was condemned by the United Nations Chief of Human Rights last week as a “disturbing abuse of terrorism laws.
Volker Türk urged England to remove the ban he said was “disproportionate and unnecessary”.
Blinne Ni Ghralaıgh KC argued for Mrs. Ammori that the judge’s approaching Palestinian action should be banned before the upcoming court case. “For three months, the restriction of speech is irreparable,” he said.
“The order should be suspended less and all of these are solved by the court. It should not fall to the members of the people to carry the burden of extraordinary wide measures.”
Responding to the Supreme Court decision, Greenpeace’s co -director of England, Areeba Hamid, said, “Protests are not the same as terrorism, even if they are destructive or disturbing.
He said: “We support this decision and we hope that the judicial examination will reveal this forbidden order for the ominous and anti-democratic movement.
“The treatment of direct action as terrorism is the increase in the ongoing pressure on protest and freedom of speech in the UK.”
At the beginning of this month, Ms. Ammori’s lawyers asked a judge to allow a high court to bring a high court against the ban, and described it as a “illegal intervention” with freedom of expression.
Raza Husain KC said that the ban on the court for Ms. Ammori made England a “international contrary ve and was“ disgusting ”.
Bay Husain added: “The decision to ban the Palestinian action had the distinguishing features of authoritarian and open power abuse.”
For the Ministry of Interior, Sir James Eadie KC, in written applications, caused serious damage to the property, the Palestinian action is a “square ında in some of the laws of terrorism used in the prohibition.
He said: “There is no reliable basis that the aim of this activity is not designed to influence the government or to scare part of the people or the people and to advance a political, religious, racial or ideological case.”
This is a breaking story ..
