An intelligence assessment revealed that most of Palestine Action's activities were lawful, prompting legal representatives to challenge the proscription imposed by Yvette Cooper. Raza Husain KC described the ban as authoritarian and a blatant abuse of power. The high court hearing questioned the minister's claim that only three of Palestine Action's actions met the definition of terrorism out of 385. The legal team argued that the proscription violated freedom of expression and resulted in numerous arrests at protests, highlighting issues related to the limitations on political expression.
Raza Husain KC stated that the intelligence assessment indicated that the vast majority of Palestine Action's activities were lawful, with only three out of 385 actions qualifying as terrorism.
Yvette Cooper's decision to ban Palestine Action was characterized as 'repugnant,' and it was claimed to be an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power impacting freedom of expression.
29. The case highlighted significant arrests connected to protests, where demonstrators were questioned or detained based on their attire and placards supporting Palestine, showcasing suppression of free speech.
Legal representatives argued that the proscription had severely affected freedoms enshrined in the European convention, with one individual warned against discussing Palestine as part of their bail conditions.
Collection
[
|
...
]