🔗 Share this article

Government papers indicate that policymakers proceeded with a proscription on the activist network even after receiving advice that such measures could “inadvertently enhance” the group’s profile, according to newly obtained internal records.

Background

This advisory report was prepared a quarter prior to the legal outlawing of the network, which was established to take direct action designed to halt UK arms supplies to Israel.

It was written three months ago by personnel at the interior ministry and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, aided by counter-terrorism policing experts.

Public Perception

Under the title “In what way might the outlawing of the organisation be regarded by the UK public”, a part of the briefing alerted that a proscription could prove to be a controversial matter.

The document characterized the group as a “modest specialized organization with reduced general news exposure” compared to other protest organizations like Just Stop Oil. Yet it highlighted that the network’s direct actions, and detentions of its activists, gained media attention.

The advisers said that research indicated “increasing frustration with Israel’s defense methods and actions in Gaza”.

Prior to its main point, the report cited a study showing that 60% of Britons felt Israel had gone too far in the war in Gaza and that a like percentage supported a prohibition on military sales.

“These constitute viewpoints around which Palestine Action group builds its profile, campaigning directly to oppose the nation’s arms industry in the UK,” officials wrote.

“Should that Palestine Action is banned, their profile may unintentionally be amplified, finding support among sympathetic members of the public who disagree with the British role in the Israel’s weapons trade.”

Additional Warnings

Officials noted that the public were against calls from the rightwing media for strict measures, such as a ban.

Other sections of the report mentioned polling saying the citizens had a “general lack of awareness” regarding Palestine Action.

The document said that “a significant segment of the British public are presumably currently ignorant of Palestine Action and would remain so in the event of outlawing or, should they learn, would remain largely indifferent”.

The ban under anti-terror legislation has resulted in protests where numerous people have been apprehended for displaying banners in the streets stating “I am against genocide, I stand with the group”.

The document, which was a public reaction study, noted that a proscription under terrorism laws could increase religious tensions and be seen as government partiality in toward Israel.

The briefing warned ministers and high-level staff that outlawing could become “a trigger for major dispute and criticism”.

Recent Events

Huda Ammori of the network, commented that the briefing’s advisories had proven accurate: “Knowledge of the matters and popularity of the network have grown exponentially. This proscription has backfired.”

The interior minister at the period, Yvette Cooper, declared the ban in June, shortly following the organization’s supporters supposedly committed acts at a military base in the county. Officials claimed the damage was significant.

The schedule of the document demonstrates the ban was being planned ahead of it was made public.

Policymakers were informed that a outlawing might be regarded as an undermining of civil liberties, with the experts stating that some within the administration as well as the wider public may see the decision as “a gradual extension of security authorities into the domain of speech rights and demonstration.”

Official Responses

A Home Office representative commented: “The group has engaged in an growing wave involving vandalism to the UK’s key installations, intimidation, and reported assaults. Such behavior places the wellbeing of the population at peril.

“Rulings on proscription are not taken lightly. They are informed by a comprehensive evidence-based procedure, with input from a broad spectrum of advisers from across government, the law enforcement and the MI5.”

A counter-terrorism policing spokesperson said: “Judgments relating to outlawing are a prerogative for the administration.

“In line with public expectations, national security forces, in conjunction with a variety of other agencies, routinely provide material to the interior ministry to assist their work.”

This briefing also revealed that the Cabinet Office had been funding monthly studies of public strain related to the Middle East conflict.