🔗 Share this article

Official documents show that ministers enacted a ban on Palestine Action even after obtaining counsel that such measures could “accidentally amplify” the group’s visibility, according to recently uncovered government records.

The Situation

The briefing report was drafted three months before the formal banning of the network, which came into being to take direct action designed to halt UK weapons exports to Israel.

This was written three months ago by officials at the department of home affairs and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, with input from anti-terror advisers.

Opinion Polling

Under the subheading “In what way might the banning of the organisation be regarded by the UK public”, a segment of the document warned that a outlawing could become a divisive topic.

The document characterized Palestine Action as a “small specialized movement with less mainstream media coverage” in contrast with other direct action movements including environmental activists. However, it observed that the organisation’s protests, and detentions of its supporters, received publicity.

Experts stated that polling showed “rising discontent with IDF tactics in Gaza”.

Leading up to its key argument, the briefing cited a poll finding that 60% of the UK public thought Israel had gone too far in the conflict in Gaza and that a comparable proportion backed a restriction on weapons exports.

“These constitute positions based on which PAG defines itself, campaigning directly to resist Israel’s military exports in the United Kingdom,” the document stated.

“In the event that PAG is proscribed, their profile may inadvertently be enhanced, finding support among like-thinking citizens who reject the UK involvement in the Israeli arms industry.”

Further Concerns

Experts noted that the public opposed demands from the certain outlets for tough action, like a outlawing.

Further segments of the document cited research saying the population had a “limited knowledge” concerning the network.

Officials wrote that “much of the UK population are likely currently uninformed of Palestine Action and would stay that way if there is a ban or, if informed, would remain largely indifferent”.

The ban under terrorism laws has sparked demonstrations where many individuals have been arrested for holding up signs in open spaces declaring “I reject atrocities, I support the network”.

The report, which was a community impact assessment, stated that a outlawing under anti-terror statutes could escalate inter-community strains and be seen as official partiality in toward Israel.

Officials cautioned policymakers and high-level staff that a ban could become “a trigger for substantial dispute and criticism”.

Aftermath

Huda Ammori of Palestine Action, commented that the document’s predictions had come true: “Awareness of the matters and popularity of the organization have grown exponentially. The outlawing has had the opposite effect.”

The senior official at the period, Yvette Cooper, declared the proscription in the summer, immediately after the network’s activists reportedly caused damage at a military base in the county. Government representatives claimed the damage was extensive.

The chronology of the report indicates the outlawing was being planned long prior to it was announced.

Policymakers were advised that a outlawing might be perceived as an undermining of individual rights, with the advisers saying that some within the cabinet as well as the broader population may consider the action as “an expansion of terrorism powers into the realm of free expression and activism.”

Official Responses

A Home Office spokesperson stated: “The group has carried out an growing wave entailing vandalism to Britain’s key installations, harassment, and claimed attacks. These actions puts the protection of the public at peril.

“Judgments on outlawing are thoroughly evaluated. They are guided by a thorough data-supported system, with contributions from a wide range of experts from multiple agencies, the police and the Security Service.”

An anti-terror law enforcement representative stated: “Decisions regarding banning are a matter for the administration.

“In line with public expectations, anti-terror units, together with a variety of further organizations, regularly offer data to the Home Office to aid their operations.”

The document also disclosed that the executive branch had been paying for periodic surveys of public strain associated with the Middle East conflict.