Lord Peter Mandelson is seen leaving his home in Wiltshire, England, on February 20, 2026, days before his arrest by UK police on suspicion of misconduct in public office. (Photo by Ben Birchall/PA Images via Getty Images)
“In the UK, they are prosecuting the Epstein class…” said Rep. Ro Khanna. “We need accountability in the United States.”
After a second prominent associate of Jeffrey Epstein was arrested in the UK, calls are growing louder for those in the US who may have been complicit in his crimes to face similar accountability.
Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador to the US, was arrested by police on Monday on “suspicion of misconduct in public office.” The arrest is reportedly in connection with an investigation opened into the former minister earlier this month.
Mandelson was dismissed from his ambassadorship by Prime Minister Keir Starmer in September after leaked emails showed that he’d maintained a close friendship with Epstein long after the financier had been convicted of soliciting a minor for prostitution in 2008.
A criminal probe was opened last month after the US Department of Justice (DOJ) released more files, suggesting that in 2009, Mandelson—then a member of the UK government—had passed Epstein sensitive internal economic information that could have affected international markets.
Bank statements also show Mandelson accepting $75,000 from Epstein over several years for an unknown purpose.
He is the second powerful figure in British society to be arrested amid scrutiny of his relationship with Epstein this month. Last week, former Prince Andrew was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in office, after emails showed him forwarding trade reports to Epstein, which were produced during his role as an official UK envoy.
Epstein had been charged with the sex trafficking of dozens of underage girls before his death in jail in 2019, and connections with the financier have led prominent individuals across Europe to be shamed out of office or out of influential corporate positions.
Neither Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor nor Mandelson has been criminally charged with any sexual misconduct related to the billionaire. However, at least two women have publicly accused Mountbatten-Windsor of having sex with them while underage after procuring them through Epstein.
In 2022, Mountbatten-Windsor settled a civil suit for about £12 million with Virginia Giuffre, who alleged that the former prince had sex with her when she was 17.
Peter Mandelson, the former British Ambassador to the US, was arrested today on suspicion of misconduct in public office. This is after files revealed Jeffrey Epstein sent $75,000 to accounts connected to him. As we have said before: no one is above the law. We will make sure… https://t.co/Sjf8FjnWSu
The arrest of yet another British government official for inappropriate dealings with Epstein has only heightened the contrast with the unaccountability of American elites, who have thus far emerged from the Epstein scandal unscathed despite damning connections.
“Peter Mandelson, the former British Ambassador to the US, was arrested today on suspicion of misconduct in public office. This is after files revealed Jeffrey Epstein sent $75,000 to accounts connected to him,” wrote the official social media account for the Democrats on the House Oversight Committee, which oversees the release of the files. “As we have said before: No one is above the law. We will make sure accountability and justice come to everyone in Epstein’s world.”
Files released by the DOJ in January, in compliance with a law passed last year, showed that at least one woman had accused Trump of sexually assaulting her in the 1980s after being introduced to him by Epstein, and that the FBI considered her to be credible, speaking to her on at least four occasions. It is not known what happened as a result of the investigation, and the DOJ slideshow referencing her allegation has since been scrubbed from the department’s website.
Meanwhile, at least six other members of the current Trump administration have documented ties to Epstein revealed by the files.
Most notably, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick was revealed to have lied when he claimed to have cut off connections to the billionaire in the early 2000s. In fact, Lutnick maintained a relationship with Epstein for nearly a decade after the billionaire registered as a sex offender and even visited his infamous Caribbean island with his family.
Many other figures in the upper echelon of American society also maintained close relationships with Epstein despite his criminal conviction, including former President Bill Clinton, Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.
Following news of Mandelson’s arrest, US Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.)—who has led the charge for the release of the files in full to the American public, along with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—said he wanted to see similar investigations and charges against Epstein’s American associates.
“In UK, they are prosecuting the Epstein class [Massie] and I have exposed,” Khanna wrote on social media. “We need accountability in the United States.”
Donald Fuhrump says that Amerikkka doesn’t bother with crimes or charges anymore, not being 100% Amerikkkan and opposing his real estate intentions is enough.Orcas discuss Donald Trump and the killer apes’ concept of democracy. Front Orca warns that Trump is crashing his country’s economy and that everything he does he does for the fantastically wealthy.Keir Starmer discusses the UK Labour Party’s tradion of excusing and protecting child rapists.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer leaves 10 Downing Street to attend the weekly Prime Minister’s Questions in London, United Kingdom on December 3, 2025. [Raşid Necati Aslım – Anadolu Agency]
Pressed over dropping plans to officially define Islamophobia, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer dodged the question on Wednesday, offering instead general remarks condemning “hatred,” Anadolu reports.
During Prime Minister’s Questions, independent MP Shockat Adam asked why an official definition of Islamophobia – accepted by the party while in opposition – had been abandoned in government, citing several high-profile attacks on Muslims, including fatal incidents outside places of worship,
“Islamophobia is real, at least for Zaynab Hussain in my city, who was run over, not just once, but twice, simply for being a Muslim. She survived. Not so lucky was Makram Ali, who was killed outside Finsbury Mosque simply for being Muslim. Not so lucky was Mohamed Saleem, who was stabbed to death simply for being a Muslim,” Adam said.
He then asked Starmer what has changed within the Labour government to drop the term Islamophobia.
Not addressing the policy shift, Starmer instead offered general remarks condemning hatred.
“Hatred in all its forms should be condemned by all of us in this House,” he said, adding that the government intends to act on anti-Muslim sentiment. He did not comment on what had changed since government ministers withdrew support for the definition.
The government has not provided a timeline for revisiting the issue, and Wednesday’s exchange drew renewed attention to concerns from advocacy groups, who say the lack of clarity leaves gaps in policy and enforcement.
This work by Middle East Monitor is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Orcas discuss Genocide-supporting and complicit Zionists. Donald Trump, Keith Starmer, David Lammy, Rachel Reeves, Angela Rayner and Wes Streeting are acknowledged as evil genocide-complicit and supporting cnuts.Keir Starmer justifies why he has to travel abroad so much
The UK has announced much harsher rules for asylum seekers including the prospect of more deportations for those whose applications fail. The US is trebling the size of its deportation force. The EU is doubling its border budgets. And in the coming decades, hundreds of millions of people might be displaced by ecological changes.
In the face of this challenge, those countries which are most responsible for climate change have two options. Either they can share resources more equitably, and fund adaptation plans on a massive scale. Or they can prevent others from accessing resources and liveable land through physical and regulatory walls, enforced through mass deportation.
Recent events show that, faced with this choice, many governments are choosing not to share resources to anywhere near the extend needed, and are instead building higher walls.
Climate change is already making life unliveable in some parts of the world. According to a 2020 report from thinktank the Institute for Economics and Peace (IEP), 2.6 billion people face high or extreme water stress. By 2040, this may jump to 5.4 billion. Droughts, heatwaves, floods, cyclones, food shortages and related conflicts will force millions from their homes.
Most of these people will move internally within nations, but this too is likely to mean more walls and borders. In very unequal countries, internal migration has already triggered security-driven responses, with a rise in gated communities and other segregated living arrangements to keep the poorer away from the wealthy.
Many other climate migrants will be pushed to travel internationally. It’s likely their motivation will be characterised by many as economic rather than due to climate change. But it’s misleading to separate “economic” from “climate” migrants. When drought kills crops in Somalia or floods wash away farmland in Pakistan, the loss of income is inseparable from the climate shocks that caused it.
Even before the worst impacts hit, climate change is already woven into the economic pressures that push people to move – shrinking harvests, emptying wells and ruining livelihoods. The most severe climate-driven displacement is still ahead, but it has already begun.
Importantly, these pressures come with inequalities in causing climate change and bearing the costs. The richest 1% of the world’s population produces as much carbon as the poorest two-thirds, according to a study of global emissions in 2019 by Oxfam. Northern Europe and the US alone account for 92% of historical emissions.
Those who have contributed the least to climate change are the worst affected and often have the fewest resources to adapt, forcing many people to migrate.
More walls, more deportations
In this context, governments of wealthier countries are massively increasing spending on migration policing. In the US, proposed funding levels are extraordinary.
Recent legislation allocates nearly US$30 billion (£22 billion) to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (Ice) for enforcement and deportation operations – roughly three times its current budget.
The US has also authorised US$45 billion for new detention centres – a 265% increase, more than the entire defence budget of Italy – and US$46.6 billion for additional border walls. Under this plan, Ice would become the largest US law enforcement agency, three times the size of the FBI.
Donald Trump’s policies can be easily labelled as the excess of one would-be autocrat, but this is a global trend across the political spectrum, albeit implemented with more acceptable language by the centre-left.
Introducing the UK Labour government’s new asylum and returns policy, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said: “We need an approach with a stronger deterrent effect and rules that are robustly enforced.” But previously-supportive MPs from his own party have warned this will mean “Ice-style raids” to deport asylum seekers.
The European Commission’s 2028–34 budget proposal earmarks €25.2 billion (£21.7 billion) for border management and €12 billion for migration, plus €11.9 billion for the Frontex border agency – more than double its current resources.
All this effectively triples current migration and border spending. In 2024, the EU ordered 453,000 non-EU nationals to leave, and actually deported 110,000 of them.
This is part of a much wider pattern, with borders today being far more militarised than at the end of the cold war. After decades of globalisation, states are now reterritorialising, building armoured fortifications against unwanted flows.
In the past two decades, more than 70 new international barriers have gone up, including Poland’s barbed-wire fence with Belarus, Greece’s steel wall on the Turkish border, Turkey’s stone wall on its Iranian border, and the new sections of the infamous wall between the US and Mexico.
Israel has built an “iron wall” around Gaza and border fences through much of the West Bank. Supposedly built to prevent Palestinians moving into Israel, these barriers have become a clear example of migration control tied to power grabs for land and resources.
A crossroads for human rights
Resource-driven migration pressures are rising just as the world is hardening its borders. In July 2025, the International Court of Justice declared that countries have a legal responsibility to address and compensate for climate change – and can be held accountable for their emissions. It is another signal that as humanity, we are at a crossroads.
The world can either prioritise universal human rights by sharing resources. Or it can attempt to protect a small, wealthy minority through walls, mass deportations and border violence on an unprecedented scale.
Keir Starmer refuses to be outcnuted by Nigel Farage’s chasing the racist bigot vote.Climate science denier Nigel Farage explains that it’s simple to blame asylum-seekers or Muslims for everything.
Statement by Stop the War Coalition on the right to protest
Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Prime Minister Keir Starmer are seeking to weaponise the situation to ramp up the attack on the Palestine movement, with talk of “repeated protests” being a drain on police resources, the Stop the War Coalition has said.
In response to the home secretary’s announcement of plans to crack down on pro-Palestine protests, Stop the War convenor Lindsey German said:
“Stop the War is alarmed that the UK government intends to introduce greater restrictions on the right to protest in the wake of the appalling attack at the Manchester synagogue.
“It defies logic for the Home Secretary to suggest that there should be limits placed on how often people can protest against a genocide that has been waged on the people of Gaza for two years.
“Marches organised by the Palestine coalition, which Stop the War is a part of, have been attended by hundreds of thousands of people, and we believe they are representative of majority public opinion in this country which wants to see an end to the suffering of the Palestinian people.
“We condemn the attack on the Manchester synagogue, just as we condemn recent attacks on mosques and hotels accommodating asylum seekers.
“We wholeheartedly reject the implication that our peaceful marches are in any way responsible for the attack.
“Stop the War has never conflated Israel’s illegal actions with the British Jewish community and will continue to vociferously oppose any attempt to do so.
“Our movement is multi-ethnic, peaceful and opposed to all forms of racism, including antisemitism and Islamophobia.
“Thousands of Jewish people have taken part in our demonstrations, many as part of an organised block, and will continue to do so.
“The Palestine coalition has already faced more severe restrictions on our right to assemble and protest than any other protest group, and we oppose any attempts by the government to intensify this.
“The right to protest is fundamental in any democratic society and must be defended – we will be working with others to do this in the coming months.
“We call on all our supporters to join the Palestine coalition on the streets of London next Saturday (11 October) for what will be the thirty-second national demonstration for Palestine.
“This will be another massive mobilisation of support for the Palestinians, but also an expression of our absolute commitment to defend the right to protest.”
Keir Starmer objects to criticism of the IDF. He asks how could anyone object to them starving people to death, forced marches like the Nazis did, bombing Gaza’s hospitals and universities, mass-murdering journalists, healthworkers and starving people queuing for food, killing and raping prisoners and murdering children. He calls for people to stop obstructing his genocide for Israel.Genocide denier and Current UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer is quoted that he supports Zionism without qualification. He also confirms that UK air force support has been essential in Israel’s mass-murdering genocide. Includes URLs https://www.declassifieduk.org/keir-starmers-100-spy-flights-over-gaza-in-support-of-israel/ and https://youtu.be/O74hZCKKdpAOrcas discuss Genocide-supporting and complicit Zionists. Donald Trump, Keith Starmer, David Lammy, Rachel Reeves, Angela Rayner and Wes Streeting are acknowledged as evil genocide-complicit and supporting cnuts.
Original article by Kit Klarenberg republiched from MPN under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
On July 1, British Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced that Palestine Action (PA), a crusading campaign effort, would be proscribed as a terrorist group. Describing the movement as “dangerous,” she charged that its “orchestration and enaction of aggressive and intimidatory attacks against businesses, institutions and the public” had “crossed the thresholds established in the Terrorism Act 2000.” As a result, PA is now the country’s first protest group to be formally branded a terrorist entity, placing it in the same league as al-Qaida and ISIS.
Based on Cooper’s characterization, a typical consumer of mainstream media might conclude PA posed a grave threat to Britain’s public safety and national security. However, other comments by Cooper appeared to undermine her incendiary headline charges. In justifying PA’s proscription, the Home Secretary cited recent actions conducted by the movement. These included “attacks” on factories owned by defense contractors Thales in 2022 and Instro Precision in 2024, each causing more than £1 million in damages.
As hundreds of lawyers and multiple U.N. experts argued in the week before the proscription took effect, the move set an extremely dangerous precedent not only in Britain but for Palestine solidarity efforts worldwide. The group did not engage in activities that could plausibly be categorized as “terrorism”—a highly contentious concept, popularized by Israel for political reasons—in other Western jurisdictions. Average citizens were not in Palestine Action’s crosshairs, and not once did the group’s activism harm a human being.
Instead, PA engaged in multifaceted civil disobedience, targeting firms closely tied to Israel’s slaughter of Palestinians, most prominently the Israeli-owned defense giant Elbit Systems. Entities providing services to those targets—such as companies leasing commercial space to Elbit—were also in the group’s crosshairs. These actions proved devastatingly effective, hitting Elbit’s bottom line at home and abroad. PA’s disruption also brought unwelcome mainstream attention to Elbit’s operations, spotlighting the firm in ways it clearly sought to avoid.
In proscribing Palestine Action, the British government may have been motivated, in part, by a desire to avoid awkward questions and inconvenient disclosures. In one of the group’s final actions, on June 19, several members broke into Royal Air Force base Brize Norton and defaced two military planes parked there. The site is a key hub for refueling and repairing British jets that have conducted hundreds of reconnaissance flights over Gaza since the genocide began in October 2023.
These routine surveillance flights are just one component of London’s active involvement in the genocide, which authorities systematically seek to conceal from public view. Another is the presence of the SAS conducting “counterterrorism” operations in Gaza, which has been covered up via direct state decree. However, the origins of Palestine Action’s proscription stretch back much further. The story behind the ban is a sordid and largely hidden one marked by long-running, opaque collusion between British and Israeli authorities and the global arms industry.
The Legal and Political Fallout
As a result of PA’s proscription, it is now a criminal offense to be a member of, or to express “support” for, the group, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. However, an Actionist who wishes to remain anonymous predicts many will deliberately breach the proscription order, knowing they’ll face legal consequences, to increase pressure on authorities. Already, dozens of British citizens — including an 83-year-old priest — have been arrested for peacefully displaying signs declaring, “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”
“Things are going to happen, without doubt. The group may be proscribed, but you can’t proscribe ideas, whether that’s opposition to the Holocaust in Gaza, sympathy with Israel’s innocent victims, or a desire to disrupt the network of genocide in Britain to which Elbit and its subsidiaries and suppliers are so central,” the Actionist tells MintPress News. “Still, the chilling effect on Palestine solidarity is obvious, and no doubt deliberate.”
The mass arrest of peaceful demonstrators for simply expressing sympathy for Palestine Action highlights a deeply troubling aspect of British “counterterror” legislation. The term “support” isn’t even clearly defined, and according to legal precedents, can extend far beyond practical or tangible assistance, to “intellectual” support, including “agreement with and approval” or “speaking in favor” of a proscribed group. In December 2024, UN experts expressed immense disquiet over this “vague and overbroad” interpretation, warning that it could “unjustifiably criminalize legitimate expression.”
“The proscription of Palestine Action is unprecedented. It’s the first time Britain has banned as ‘terrorist’ a protest group which has never used guns or bombs,” Asa Winstanley of Electronic Intifada tells MintPress News. “It seems like a massive overreach, and therefore it’s not surprising there’s been lots of civil disobedience in response.”
Surprisingly, even The Times, typically a reliable megaphone for Britain’s intelligence, military and security apparatus, published an editorial on July 7 intensely critical of “the heavy-handed branding of Palestine Action as terrorists,” dubbing the proscription “absurd.” While describing the group as “a malign force” and “antisocial menace,” the outlet argued that activists’ damage to commercial and private property could be “prosecuted into submission” under existing criminal law and the use of “lighter-touch measures” given the level of threat posed by Palestine Action.
Notably absent from The Times editorial was any consideration of the fact that criminal proceedings against Palestine Action frequently ended in failure. In several cases, Actionists who caused mass disruption or damage to Elbit sites walked free even on relatively minor charges, because the company declined to provide police or prosecutors with witnesses or other evidence.
Elbit is extremely wary of advertising the central role its arsenal plays in the killing of Palestinians. The company’s marketing brochures typically omit mention of its Israeli ownership, instead emphasizing the supposed economic and social benefits its operations deliver to British communities. A January 2023 puff piece on UAV Systems, an Elbit subsidiary repeatedly targeted by Palestine Action, even referred to the company as a “little company making repurposed Norton motorbike engines.”
In cases where Elbit did provide evidence, Actionists used the opportunity to turn the tables and place the company and the Israeli state on trial. In November 2022, five of the group’s activists who vandalized Elbit’s London HQ were acquitted. In defending their actions, several of the accused testified to witnessing first-hand atrocities committed by Israeli occupation forces in Gaza and the West Bank. While Elbit argued Palestine Action’s buckets of red paint were “improvised weapons,” the jury was not persuaded.
Palestine Action members target Allianz offices in London, demanding it stop insuring Israeli arms maker, Elbit Systems. Joao Daniel Pereira | AP
Judicial Battles and Public Defiance
Fast forward to today, and the anonymous Actionist is under no illusions that the British legal system alone will be enough to reverse Palestine Action’s proscription. “It has to be fought amongst the public, on the streets and in the courts,” they tell MintPress News. The group has applied for a judicial review in an effort to overturn its ban. This follows an application for interim relief to delay the proscription, which was denied after Yvette Cooper’s announcement.
Despite submitting an extensive witness statement outlining the serious implications that Actionists—and ordinary British citizens—could face if the ban took immediate effect, a panel of three judges took less than 90 minutes to reject the request. The justices acknowledged that there would be “serious consequences” from the government’s ban, including the risk that individuals could “unwittingly commit” criminal offenses and that those associated with the group might face “social stigma and other more serious consequences at university or at work.”
Palestine Action had warned the ban would create confusion and chaos. Police responses to pro-PA protests across Britain have varied wildly. Some resulted in no arrests, while in Wales, protesters were not only arrested under terror legislation but also had their homes raided. Videos of interactions between Palestine solidarity protesters and police suggest officers themselves are unsure about what is now lawful. In Scotland, four people were arrested for wearing T-shirts that didn’t even mention the group.
British Police Officers Say Holding A "Free Gaza" Poster Is A Terrorism Offence
Advocating against genocide in the UK is now being considered support for Palestine Action, just proscribed a terrorist group. A real time consequence of the ban.
Speaking to MintPress News, the anonymous Actionist expressed frustration over the court’s decision. “A UN Special Rapporteur supported us, warning the proscription breached international standards, but apparently British judges know better. It just shows how corrupt the entire system is. Every part of it is rotten,” they lament. “The government, almost unanimously supported by parliament, rammed through the conscription without warning or any public debate whatsoever, after falsely briefing the media we might be funded by Iran. Who will they target like this next?”
As Declassified UK has documented, nearly every major British outlet ran with the Home Office’s Iran narrative, without offering PA a rebuttal. In a particularly revealing twist, the pro-Israel lobby group We Believe In Israel—which does not disclose its funding sources—openly took credit for the government’s decision. In an X post, the organization called the proscription its “victory,” claiming it was the direct result of months of “sustained research, strategic advocacy, and evidence-based reporting” contained in a report it had published earlier in the year.
A banner reading “PROTESTING THIS ISN’T TERRORISM” is taken down by London police. Lab Mo | AP Images
Collusion and Israeli Influence
Again, the anonymous Actionist is unsurprised that British policy—if not legislation—is effectively being written by Israeli lobby groups. Yvette Cooper, Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Prime Minister Keir Starmer were all named as supporters of Labour Friends of Israel, before the list was scrubbed from the internet ahead of the 2024 general election. LFI, which praised the proscription, maintains a close relationship with Tel Aviv’s London embassy, which is widely believed to be infested with Mossad agents—a connection the group works to obscure.
In recent months, PA and independent journalists have uncovered compelling evidence that the Home Office has been in secret contact with Elbit representatives and Israel’s London embassy almost since the group’s founding in 2020. The full scope of this collusion is still unknown and may never come to light. However, documents released under Freedom of Information laws raise serious concerns about whether this concealed relationship influenced both the prosecution of Actionists and the decision to proscribe the group.
For example, in March 2022, then-Home Secretary Priti Patel met privately with Elbit UK CEO Martin Fausset to reassure the firm—and, by extension, its Israeli handlers—that the British government was taking “criminal protest acts against Elbit Systems UK” seriously. At the time, officials acknowledged that Palestine Action’s activities did “not meet the threshold for proscription” under British law. Before that meeting, no PA members had been successfully prosecuted. In the months that followed, legal actions against the group escalated dramatically.
Still, many Actionists continued to walk free. In December 2023, six members—including co-founders Huda Ammori and Richard Barnard—were acquitted of nine charges by a jury. The following month, internal correspondence revealed Elbit UK’s security director wrote to British officials expressing concern that “a re-trial is not a certainty” and suggesting it was “very much in the public interest” for the trial to be reheard.
Mere days later, a retrial was announced—for 2027. That would mark six years since the alleged offenses took place. One Actionist called the drawn-out process a “form of psychological warfare on defendants,” saying it prevents them from making long-term plans or securing employment. Meanwhile, other PA members are imprisoned awaiting trial, some already incarcerated for extended periods. There are disturbing signs that their detention and prosecution are being coordinated with Israeli authorities.
Among the most alarming revelations are heavily redacted emails showing that, in September 2024, the British Attorney General’s Office shared contact details for the Crown Prosecution Service and counterterrorism units with the Israeli embassy. The timing raises suspicions of Israeli interference in the prosecution of PA members who, earlier that month, broke into Elbit’s Filton factory and destroyed quadcopters—weapons routinely used to maim and kill Palestinians in Gaza.
In all, 18 Actionists involved are currently remanded in prison, their pre-trial detention period running to 182 days, well in excess of standard limits for non-terror-related cases. Their contact with the outside world has also been severely restricted, in violation of international legal norms. On July 15, another five PA members were arrested and charged in connection with Filton.
If the Israeli government played any role in these prosecutions, it would represent a flagrant breach of Crown Prosecution Service guidelines, which prohibit “undue pressure or influence from any source.”
In May, British prosecutors announced they would consider “terrorism connections” in the case of 10 Actionists who targeted Instro Precision, an Elbit supplier, in June 2024. While the charges—aggravated burglary, criminal damage and violent disorder—do not qualify as terrorism under British law, prosecutors say those connections may factor into sentencing. If upheld, that designation could lead to significantly harsher penalties than standard criminal charges would normally carry.
Legal Challenges Mount
On July 21, London’s High Court heard arguments from lawyers representing Huda Ammori, seeking permission to challenge Palestine Action’s proscription. In addition to citing devastating figures related to the genocide in Gaza and Elbit’s direct involvement, the legal team also emphasized the legal uncertainty now faced by activists and journalists as a result of the ban.
In response, government lawyers argued that the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission—not a judicial review—was the appropriate forum to challenge the designation. At the hearing’s conclusion, the judge stated a full ruling would be issued on July 30.
Earlier, on June 24, Jewish News revealed that British authorities had hesitated to proscribe PA out of concern that a judicial review “could overturn” the decision. That concern reportedly contributed to initial “reticence” from the Home Office. Even if the review is authorized, it could take months for a ruling to be reached.
In the meantime, journalist and legal scholar Leila Hatoum offered a stark assessment of the situation. She told MintPress News that the British state’s targeting of the group “for standing against genocide and oppression” was “nothing short of tyranny.” She added that the ban not only threatens basic rights—particularly freedom of speech and freedom of the press—but also violates international law.
The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which was adopted by the UN in 1948, notes it is the duty of all nations and peoples to act to stop a genocide. By legally pursuing those who are seeking to prevent Israel’s ongoing apartheid, occupation and genocide against the Palestinians in Gaza, especially members and supporters of Palestine Action, the UK has positioned itself against the international law, and alongside the forces of darkness. The country has failed humanity.”
A Legacy of Resistance
Despite this bleak outlook—and the possibility that the group could remain proscribed regardless of any court challenge—Palestine Action’s example remains an inspiration to people across Britain and beyond. A volunteer group of ordinary citizens, spanning every age, ethnicity, faith and gender, without financial or institutional backing, posed such a threat to entrenched power that the British government, for the first time in history, resorted to a legal “nuclear option” to neutralize them.
Civil disobedience aimed at disrupting military operations has a long and established history. Since the early 1980s, the Christian pacifist Plowshares movement has carried out sabotage against U.S. military bases and nuclear installations. In 2003, five activists were prosecuted for damaging American bombers at a British base to prevent their use in the Iraq War. One of the defendants was represented by none other than Keir Starmer, who argued successfully that although their actions were technically illegal, they were justified as an effort to prevent war crimes.
Palestine Action represents the first group to maintain this legacy during an active, ongoing genocide, but ever since its launch, it has achieved major victories. In January 2022, Elbit sold off one of its component factories, and a British government prosecutor acknowledged that PA’s sustained actions against the site “forced the closure.” Two additional Elbit sites targeted by the group have since been shut down. Governments around the world, including Brazil and even Britain, have canceled lucrative contracts with the company.
Had the British state not acted so forcefully, it is likely that Palestine Action’s momentum would have continued building, possibly forcing Elbit out of the UK entirely. Yet despite the risk of arrest or prison, solidarity with Palestine and overt support for Palestine Action show no sign of fading. As Israel’s favorability plummets to historic lows across the West, there are countless individuals around the world ready to follow PA’s example, risking their liberty to stop the ongoing genocide.
After all, it is not just a moral duty. It is a legal one.
Truth Has Enemies. We Have You.
For over a decade, MintPress News has been at the forefront of exposing Israeli apartheid, occupation, and war crimes—when few dared to. We’ve been censored, smeared, and blacklisted for telling the truth. But we haven’t stopped.
Independent journalism like this isn’t just important, it’s under attack. If you believe in reporting that defends the voiceless and challenges the powerful, we need your support.
Feature photo | A protestor holds a placard during the demonstration. Hundreds of Palestine Action protestors congregated at HMP Brixton Prison to lobby for the release of all Political Prisoners on their annual New Year’s Eve “Noise Demo”. Lab Ky Mo |Sipa | AP Images
Kit Klarenberg is an investigative journalist and MintPress News contributor exploring the role of intelligence services in shaping politics and perceptions. His work has previously appeared in The Cradle, Declassified UK, and Grayzone. Follow him on Twitter @KitKlarenberg.
MintPress News is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
Original article by Kit Klarenberg republiched from MPN under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 International License.
Keir “I support Zionism without Qualification” Starmer supporting genocide.Vote Labour for Genocide.