🔗 Share this article

Government briefings reveal that government officials enacted a proscription on the activist network even after obtaining advice that such steps could “inadvertently enhance” the organization’s profile, as shown in leaked internal records.

Context

The briefing document was written three months before the official proscription of the group, which was established to engage in activism intending to stop UK military equipment sales to Israel.

It was drafted last March by staff at the interior ministry and the local governance ministry, with input from national security specialists.

Public Perception

Following the subheading “In what way might the banning of the organisation be perceived by the UK public”, a part of the document warned that a proscription could prove to be a divisive matter.

It described Palestine Action as a “modest single issue group with reduced general news exposure” compared to comparable protest organizations like Just Stop Oil. Yet it highlighted that the group’s direct actions, and detentions of its supporters, received media attention.

Experts noted that polling indicated “growing discontent with Israeli military tactics in Gaza”.

Leading up to its central thesis, the document referenced a survey finding that 60% of Britons believed Israel had overstepped in the conflict in Gaza and that a like percentage favored a prohibition on arms shipments.

“These are stances around which Palestine Action group builds its profile, acting purposefully to oppose the nation’s arms industry in Britain,” the document stated.

“Should that the group is banned, their profile may inadvertently be amplified, gaining backing among similarly minded members of the public who disagree with the UK involvement in the the nation’s military exports.”

Further Concerns

The advisers noted that the general populace were against appeals from the rightwing media for harsh steps, including a ban.

Other sections of the report mentioned surveys indicating the citizens had a “general lack of awareness” about Palestine Action.

Officials wrote that “a large portion of the British public are likely currently ignorant of the group and would stay that way should there be outlawing or, if informed, would remain largely unconcerned”.

The ban under anti-terror legislation has sparked protests where numerous people have been arrested for carrying signs in the streets saying “I reject mass killings, I support the network”.

The document, which was a community impact assessment, noted that a outlawing under anti-terror statutes could increase inter-community frictions and be seen as government partiality in favour of Israel.

The document warned ministers and senior officials that proscription could become “a flashpoint for substantial controversy and objections”.

Recent Events

Huda Ammori of the network, said that the briefing’s warnings had materialized: “Understanding of the matters and support of the organization have increased dramatically. This proscription has had the opposite effect.”

The home secretary at the point, the secretary, announced the proscription in the summer, shortly following the group’s members reportedly caused damage at RAF Brize Norton in the county. Government representatives stated the damage was extensive.

The timing of the briefing shows the proscription was under consideration long prior to it was announced.

Policymakers were advised that a proscription might be regarded as an assault on individual rights, with the experts noting that some within government as well as the general citizenry may consider the decision as “a creep of security authorities into the domain of liberty and demonstration.”

Official Responses

A departmental official commented: “The network has conducted an escalating campaign involving property destruction to Britain’s national security infrastructure, intimidation, and alleged violence. That activity puts the protection of the population at peril.

“Judgments on proscription are thoroughly evaluated. They are guided by a comprehensive data-supported system, with input from a broad spectrum of specialists from multiple agencies, the authorities and the MI5.”

A national security policing spokesperson stated: “Judgments concerning outlawing are a prerogative for the administration.

“As the public would expect, anti-terror units, together with a variety of other agencies, routinely provide material to the interior ministry to aid their work.”

The document also disclosed that the central government had been funding regular surveys of public strain connected to the regional situation.