UK High Court Rules Government’s Ban on Palestine Action Unlawful

Britain’s High Court has ruled that the UK Government’s decision to ban the pro-Palestinian activist group Palestine Action under anti-terrorism laws was unlawful, marking a major legal reversal and intensifying debate over the limits of protest rights.

The judgment, delivered on 13 February 2026, found that the Home Office’s proscription of the group in July 2025 was “disproportionate” and did not meet the legal threshold required to designate an organisation as a terrorist entity under the Terrorism Act 2000, the court said.

Ruling Highlights

The panel of judges, led by Dame Victoria Sharp along with Justices Jonathan Swift and Karen Steyn, concluded that while some actions by Palestine Action may have involved criminality, the nature, scale and persistence of those acts did not justify terrorist proscription.

The ruling emphasised the interference with fundamental rights including freedom of expression and peaceful assembly, noting that the government failed to properly apply its own counter-terror policy in making the ban.

Ban Still in Effect Pending Appeal

Despite the ruling that the ban is unlawful, it remains temporarily in place while the government considers its next steps, including an appeal against the High Court’s decision.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood defended the original proscription, asserting its necessity for national security and insisting it does not prevent peaceful support for Palestine.

Legal and Social Fallout

Since being proscribed, the group’s designation made membership or support a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment, drawing criticism from human rights organisations and civil liberties advocates.

Police enforcement saw thousands of arrests, many for acts such as holding placards supporting the group, raising fresh concerns about the impact on democratic protest.

Co-founder Huda Ammori welcomed the ruling as a “monumental victory” for civil liberties, arguing the proscription was an excessive use of counter-terror powers against a protest group.

Broader Implications

Legal experts say the judgment sets a significant precedent on the use of anti-terror legislation in the UK. Critics of the ban have long argued that applying such laws to advocacy and protest risks chilling free speech rights and diluting the intended focus of terrorism statutes.

The government’s expected appeal will likely prolong legal uncertainty, with potential consequences for ongoing and future prosecutions linked to the proscription.