Abstract

In June 2025, the former Secretary of State for the Home Department (‘Home Secretary’), Yvette Cooper, announced that the British government wished to proscribe Palestine Action. The decision to finally proscribe Palestine Action had come when two of its activists had broken into RAF Brize Norton, in Oxfordshire, spraying red paint into the turbines of two Voyager aircraft and causing £7m worth of damage. The UK government has asserted that the proscription of Palestine Action must not deter people from protesting in support of pro-Palestinian groups and/or in opposition to the actions of the Israeli government; the right to peaceful protest is unaffected by the ban. However, since June 2025, about 2000 people have been arrested, protesting the proscription. The decision to ban Palestine Action means that there are now 98 organisations that are proscribed in the UK. What is unique about the proscription of Palestine Action is that, unlike the other 97 banned groups, the modus operandi of Palestine Action is not a commitment to violence against people: they are a direct-action protest group. Should serious damage against property be included in the legal definition of terrorism in the UK, justifying the proscription of Palestine Action?