{"id":317023,"date":"2026-06-08T12:00:13","date_gmt":"2026-06-08T11:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=317023"},"modified":"2026-06-03T13:42:33","modified_gmt":"2026-06-03T12:42:33","slug":"revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2026\/06\/revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists\/","title":{"rendered":"Revealed: How Britain Weaponised Terrorism Laws against Activists"},"content":{"rendered":"<div id=\"attachment_317025\" style=\"width: 510px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism.webp\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-317025\" class=\"wp-image-317025\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism-1024x606.webp\" alt=\"\" width=\"500\" height=\"296\" srcset=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism-1024x606.webp 1024w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism-300x178.webp 300w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism-768x455.webp 768w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism-1536x909.webp 1536w, https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/uk-activism-terrorism.webp 2048w\" sizes=\"auto, (max-width: 500px) 100vw, 500px\" \/><\/a><p id=\"caption-attachment-317025\" class=\"wp-caption-text\">Five of the six Palestine Action activists tried in the first Filton case outside Woolwich Crown Court.\u00a0 (Photo: Alamy)<\/p><\/div>\n<blockquote><p>27 May 2026 &#8211; <em>Four Palestine Action activists could be sentenced as terrorists next month. New documents expose the UK government\u2019s crackdown on pro-Palestine activism.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n<div class=\"et_pb_column et_pb_column_4_4 et_pb_column_0_tb_body  et_pb_css_mix_blend_mode_passthrough et-last-child\">\n<div class=\"et_pb_module et_pb_text et_pb_text_1_tb_body ls-summary-bullets  et_pb_text_align_left et_pb_bg_layout_light\">\n<div class=\"et_pb_text_inner\">\n<ul>\n<li>Activists could be sentenced as terrorists despite not being convicted of terrorism<\/li>\n<li>Documents suggest \u201cterrorism connection\u201d was added to cases to help justify proscription of Palestine Action<\/li>\n<li>Authorities refuse to say when criminal damage crosses threshold into terrorism<\/li>\n<li>Intelligence report indicates actions costing over \u00a31m could be treated as terrorism<\/li>\n<li>Arms companies could be incentivised to inflate protest-related damage costs to aggravate charges<\/li>\n<li>Palestine Action ban could be overturned next month<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"et_pb_module et_pb_post_content et_pb_post_content_0_tb_body\">\n<p>Four activists could be sentenced as terrorists next month despite not being convicted of terrorism offences.<\/p>\n<p>Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Rajwani are among several Palestine Action activists accused of raiding an Israeli weapons factory in Bristol in 2024.<\/p>\n<p>They were found guilty of criminal damage earlier this month at Woolwich Crown Court, with Corner also convicted of grievous bodily harm without intent.<\/p>\n<p>Two others, Zoe Rogers and Jordan Devlin, were found not guilty despite telling the court that they were proud of their actions.<\/p>\n<p>During the trial, a jury was asked to decide whether the defendants were guilty of criminal charges but not allowed to know there was also a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The 12-panel jury was also not permitted to hear why the defendants chose to target the Israeli arms firm, stripping the action of all context \u2013 namely the genocide in Gaza.<\/p>\n<p>It is now up to the presiding judge to decide whether to sentence the activists with a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d \u2013 and, if he does, the ramifications will be enormous.<\/p>\n<p>Unlike most prisoners in the UK who serve around 40 percent of their sentences, they would have to serve their full terms unless they can convince a parole board that they have \u201creformed\u201d after serving at least two-thirds of it.<\/p>\n<p>Once released, they could be treated as terrorists for decades.<\/p>\n<p>And this could all happen without a jury ever finding them guilty of any terrorist offence, marking the first case where activists risk prosecution under terrorism provisions.<\/p>\n<p>How did we get here?<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-terrorism-connection\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>\u2018Terrorism connection\u2019<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>The <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legislation.gov.uk\/ukpga\/2000\/11\/contents\" >Terrorism Act (2000)<\/a> defined an action as \u201cterrorism\u201d if it:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Involves serious violence against a person<\/li>\n<li>Involves serious damage to property<\/li>\n<li>Endangers a person\u2019s life, other than that of the person committing the action<\/li>\n<li>Creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or<\/li>\n<li>Is designed seriously to interfere with or seriously to disrupt an electronic system<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>And it:<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li>Is designed to influence the government or an international governmental organisation or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and<\/li>\n<li>Is made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial, or ideological cause<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<p>When debating the act, home secretary Jack Straw <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/hansard.parliament.uk\/commons\/1999-12-14\/debates\/b8b65fd0-3cdc-4cc0-9d23-dfce015aa510\/TerrorismBill\" >reassured<\/a> parliament that those definitions \u201cwill not catch the vast majority of so-called domestic activist groups which exist in the country today\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>That included groups like Greenpeace which were engaged in direct action campaigns on issues ranging from militarism to the environment.<\/p>\n<p>Home Office minister Charles Clake <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/hansard.parliament.uk\/commons\/1999-12-14\/debates\/b8b65fd0-3cdc-4cc0-9d23-dfce015aa510\/TerrorismBill\" >added<\/a> that the new proscription powers would only be used \u201cwhen absolutely necessary\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>To this end, it was broadly understood that the act was not intended to allow for the designation of activism as terrorism on the basis of property damage that did not pose a threat to life or safety.<\/p>\n<p>In 2021, the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act allowed prosecutors to attach a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d to a criminal case at a much lower bar than before.<\/p>\n<p>It <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legislation.gov.uk\/ukpga\/2020\/17\/section\/69\" >allowed<\/a> non-terrorist offences which carried over two years of imprisonment to be sentenced with a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d without those charges being heard by a jury.<\/p>\n<p>One of the few dissenting voices to this amendment was Lord Marks, who <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.theyworkforyou.com\/lords\/?id=2021-03-03b.1156.5\" >noted<\/a> how sentencing individuals on the \u201cbasis of a decision taken by a judge alone, without hearing any evidence\u2026 would cut across the principle of our criminal law\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>He added: \u201cNo one should be convicted of an offence except upon admissible evidence, open to challenge in a trial and, if in the Crown Court, heard by a jury\u201d.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-the-filton-incident\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The Filton incident<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>On 6 August 2024, activists from Palestine Action raided an Elbit Systems facility in Filton, Bristol.<\/p>\n<p>Inside the factory, they clashed with security guards \u2013 one of whom allegedly hit an activist with a sledgehammer \u2013 and destroyed property including military drones.<\/p>\n<p>Some of the activists were rounded up at the scene and detained under ordinary criminal provisions, but after 36 hours they were re-arrested under section 5 of the Terrorism Act.<\/p>\n<p>Section 5 \u201cestablishes the offence of the preparation of an act of terrorism or assistance to another to commit an act of terrorism\u201d. Anyone found guilty is liable to life imprisonment.<\/p>\n<p>So extreme was this police response that a group of UN special rapporteurs <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/spcommreports.ohchr.org\/TMResultsBase\/DownLoadPublicCommunicationFile?gId=29507\" >sounded the alarm<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>In a letter sent to the UK government, they observed how \u201cUK police have exercised significant powers under counter-terrorism legislation despite the absence of credible connection between the activists\u2019 conduct to terrorism as properly defined\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The Filton activists were not ultimately charged under the Terrorism Act. But the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) later announced it would submit to the court that the first case being tried against the Filton activists had a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d under the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act.<\/p>\n<p>This marked the first time that such provisions had been used against activists \u2013 and seemed to prepare the groundwork for the proscription of Palestine Action as a whole.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-proscribing-palestine-action-nbsp\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Proscribing Palestine Action\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Documents seen by <em>Declassified<\/em> reveal how the UK government was considering the proscription of Palestine Action before the action in Filton.<\/p>\n<p>A Counter Terrorism Policing (CTP) report dated 27 June 2024, some five weeks before the incident, discusses a meeting with the CPS about \u201cthe resource implications for CTP\u201d if Palestine Action were \u201cdeclared as a terrorist group\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The report contained a CTP threat matrix which identified four categories of \u201cactivism\u201d. They ranged from \u201clawful activism\u201d to \u201cterrorism\u201d as defined under the Terrorism Act.<\/p>\n<p>In the view of the activists\u2019 lawyers, this timeline suggested the \u201cterrorist connection\u201d was added to the Filton action to build a legal justification for proscribing the group as a whole.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe material decision making agencies appreciated that in order for Palestine Action to be proscribed as a terrorist entity, rather than high level aggravated activism, there would need to be \u2018terrorist\u2019 organisation\u201d, the lawyers argued during an abuse of process hearing last year.<\/p>\n<p>They added that those agencies required concrete instances of \u201cterrorism\u201d in order to proscribe, with the first Filton hearing being \u201ccharged in a way that enabled Palestine Action to meet the definition of a terrorist organisation\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Indeed, former home secretary Yvette Cooper used the \u201cterrorism connection\u201d issue when justifying her decision to proscribe Palestine Action in parliament last June.<\/p>\n<p>Two months later, she also <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/observer.co.uk\/news\/opinion-and-ideas\/article\/palestine-actions-violent-criminality-is-not-lawful-protest\" >wrote in the <em>Observer<\/em><\/a> that charges against Palestine Action activists included a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d when seeking to explain her decision to proscribe.<\/p>\n<p>That article was published despite internal advice that it <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.theguardian.com\/uk-news\/2026\/may\/17\/yvette-cooper-palestine-action-article-despite-cps-warning-trial\" >risked<\/a> prejudicing the criminal proceedings against the Filton activists, suggesting proscription was the key priority.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-serious-property-damage\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Serious property damage<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>While the \u201cterrorism connection\u201d to the Filton case was used to justify proscription, it remains unclear how the authorities have determined when protest-related criminal damage crosses the line into terrorism.<\/p>\n<p>Palestine Action has engaged in hundreds of direct action campaigns since it was founded in 2020. But at the time of proscription, the authorities only referred to three incidents which allegedly met the threshold for \u201cterrorism\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>What made them different?<\/p>\n<p>Last year, the Attorney General\u2019s Office (AGO) was asked under the Freedom of Information (FOI) act to provide \u201cpolicy documents, guidance notes, circulars, or legal guidance issued to prosecutors\u201d regarding when to apply a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d to criminal offences.<\/p>\n<p>Internal guidance was also requested in relation to \u201cthe treatment of protest-related cases in which a terrorism connection may be considered\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The AGO responded by refusing to confirm or deny whether the information was held.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cAny documents that may or may not be held in relation to the application or proposed application of a \u2018terrorism connection\u2019 under the Sentencing Code to protest-related or criminal damage-related prosecutions would relate to the Attorney General\u2019s function as a Law Officer and chief legal adviser to the Government\u201d, it said.<\/p>\n<p>When asked for the same information, the CPS said it \u201cdoes not hold any internal CPS policy documents, guidance notes, circulars, or legal guidance within the specific scope of your request\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Taken together, it would seem that the British authorities have drawn an invisible line whereupon protest-related criminal damage crosses a legal threshold into \u201cterrorism\u201d \u2013 but the public is not allowed to know where it is.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-1-million\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>\u00a31 million<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>Despite the absence of public information on how a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d is applied, internal documents and ministerial <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/hansard.parliament.uk\/commons\/2025-07-02\/debates\/6C9338E8-E516-494A-81A2-B3FEF549DD48\/PreventionAndSuppressionOfTerrorism\" >statements<\/a> suggest that high-profile protest actions causing \u00a31m in damage or more could leave activists liable to being sentenced as terrorists.<\/p>\n<p>And this line appears to have been drawn with pro-Palestine activists in mind.<\/p>\n<p>In March 2025, when the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC), housed within MI5, recommended that Palestine Action be proscribed, its report focussed exclusively on three incidents which allegedly caused damage \u201cin excess of \u00a31m\u201d as evidence of \u201cterrorism\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>One of those three incidents was Filton, described in the JTAC report as \u201c6 August 2024 Terrorist Attack\u201d with \u201cestimated damage\u2026 to be in excess of GBP 1 million\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Another related to an action against French arms firm Thales in Glasgow in 2022 which was seemingly not assessed as terrorism until after Filton.<\/p>\n<p>In 2023, a year after the Thales action, a private briefing for a British minister<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.whatdotheyknow.com\/request\/home_office_ministerial_meetings\" > noted<\/a>: \u201cPalestine Action does not meet the threshold for proscription as they do not commit, participate in, prepare for, promote, encourage, or otherwise be concerned with acts of terrorism\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>In 2025, a Scottish counter-terrorism board <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.thenational.scot\/news\/25543064.scottish-contest-board-said-palestine-action-not-terrorist-group\/\" >observed<\/a> that Palestine Action \u201chas been focused on protest activity which has not been close to meeting the statutory definition of terrorism\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>What emerges from this timeline is that the authorities may have developed a new way of interpreting the threshold for \u201cterrorism\u201d \u2013 based on the \u201cserious damage to property\u201d limb of the Terrorism Act \u2013 and retroactively applied it to the Thales case.<\/p>\n<p>That the authorities may have modified their interpretation of what constitutes \u201cterrorism\u201d raises serious concerns in and of itself, particularly given there has been no parliamentary or public consultation on the matter.<\/p>\n<p>If any reinterpretation of the threshold for \u201cterrorism\u201d occurred after the Filton incident, this would raise concerns about<em> ex post facto<\/em> modifications of how the law is administered.<\/p>\n<p>In other words, in light of the absence of any legal precedent, it would not have been possible for the defendants to know that the incident could be treated as terrorism at the time that it took place.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, it raises the prospect that private arms companies targeted by Palestine Action could be incentivised to inflate damage costs in order to aggravate punishment for activists, potentially offering a deterrent effect against future protest activity at their sites.<\/p>\n<p>In the Thales case, which was later used to justify proscription, damage costs were estimated at around \u00a3190,000, with the company claiming \u201crevenue lost due to the site closure\u201d was \u00a3941,000.<\/p>\n<p>In another instance, damage costs relating to a Palestine Action campaign at a factory in Runcorn, Chester, were <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/freedomnews.org.uk\/2023\/05\/25\/two-imprisoned-for-dismantling-runcorn-weapons-factory\/\" >revised<\/a> down from \u00a34m to \u00a3225,000-\u00a3345,000 \u2013 amounting to a reduction of over 90 percent.<\/p>\n<p>Moreover, there appears to be no framework for ensuring the arms companies provide accurate damage reports <em>before <\/em>a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d is applied.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"h-violence-nbsp\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Violence\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n<p>In addition to emphasising actions which caused \u201cin excess of \u00a31m damage\u201d, the JTAC report made allegations about Palestine Action\u2019s use of \u201cviolence\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>While conceding that Palestine Action was \u201chighly unlikely\u201d to advocate for violence, it claimed with regard to Filton that \u201csome of the attackers attended the incident with the intent or willingness to conduct serious violence against persons in support of their political cause\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Cooper repeated these claims in parliament when she <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/questions-statements.parliament.uk\/written-statements\/detail\/2025-06-23\/hcws729\" >said<\/a> members of Palestine Action had demonstrated \u201ca willingness to use violence\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>Security minister Dan Jarvis also <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/hansard.parliament.uk\/commons\/2025-07-02\/debates\/6C9338E8-E516-494A-81A2-B3FEF549DD48\/PreventionAndSuppressionOfTerrorism\" >said<\/a> Palestine Action members \u201chave used violence against people\u201d and been \u201ccharged with a series of serious offences, including violent disorder, grievous bodily harm with intent and aggravated burglary\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>The same claims were emphasised by senior Conservative party officials, with shadow foreign secretary Priti Patel <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/x.com\/pritipatel\/status\/2023026278450798951\" >declaring<\/a> Palestine Action had \u201ca long history of violence\u201d.<\/p>\n<p>While used to strengthen the public justification for proscription, it remains unclear what if any bearing the issue of violence had on the decision to apply a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d to the first Filton defendants or to proscribe Palestine Action as a whole.<\/p>\n<p>Furthermore, since the CPS applied for a \u201cterrorism connection\u201d to be added to the first Filton case, all of the defendants have been cleared by two juries of any violent intent.<\/p>\n<p>While the Filton incident was used to publicly justify proscription, the verdict in that case, with the defendants cleared of violent intent, has undermined the public rationale for proscription.<\/p>\n<p>And now, four Filton defendants could be sentenced as terrorists despite Palestine Action not being proscribed at the time of the incident and the High Court subsequently finding the ban unlawful, pending an appeal.<\/p>\n<p>The sentencing hearing will take place on 12 June at Woolwich Crown Court. Three days later, the Court of Appeal will hand down its judgment on the legality of the Palestine Action ban.<\/p>\n<p>The Crown Prosecution Service, Attorney General\u2019s Office, and Counter Terrorism Policing were approached for comment.<\/p>\n<p>_________________________________________________<\/p>\n<p style=\"padding-left: 40px;\"><em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/John-McEvoy-e1780489533756.webp\" ><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"alignleft size-full wp-image-317024\" src=\"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/John-McEvoy-e1780489533756.webp\" alt=\"\" width=\"90\" height=\"90\" \/><\/a>John McEvoy is Chief Reporter for <\/em>Declassified UK<em>. John is an historian and filmmaker whose work focuses on British foreign policy and Latin America. His PhD was on Britain\u2019s Secret Wars in Colombia between 1948 and 2009, and he is currently working on a documentary about Britain\u2019s role in the rise of Augusto Pinochet.<\/em><\/p>\n<p><a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https:\/\/www.declassifieduk.org\/revealed-how-britain-weaponised-terrorism-laws-against-activists\/\" >Go to Original \u2013 declassifieduk.org<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>27 May 2026 &#8211; Four Palestine Action activists could be sentenced as terrorists next month. New documents expose the UK government\u2019s crackdown on pro-Palestine activism.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":317024,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[45],"tags":[229,87,865,88,1243,2571,427,3990,880,639],"class_list":["post-317023","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-activism","tag-activism","tag-gaza","tag-genocide","tag-israel","tag-nonviolent-action","tag-official-lies-and-narratives","tag-palestine","tag-palestine-action","tag-state-terrorism","tag-uk"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317023","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=317023"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317023\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":317026,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/317023\/revisions\/317026"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/317024"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=317023"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=317023"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=317023"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}