🔗 Share this article

Government papers show that policymakers implemented a proscription on the activist network notwithstanding being given warnings that such measures could “accidentally amplify” the group’s visibility, as shown in newly obtained official documents.

Background

This advisory report was written three months prior to the official proscription of the group, which came into being to take direct action designed to halt UK arms supplies to Israel.

This was prepared in March by officials at the Home Office and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, with input from anti-terror policing experts.

Survey Findings

Beneath the headline “What would be the banning of the organisation be regarded by citizens”, a segment of the report alerted that a ban could become a divisive topic.

The document characterized Palestine Action as a “small single issue organization with less mainstream media exposure” compared to comparable direct action groups including environmental activists. Yet it highlighted that the group’s protests, and arrests of its members, gained media attention.

Officials stated that surveys showed “growing discontent with Israeli military methods and actions in Gaza”.

Leading up to its central thesis, the report cited a study showing that 60% of the UK public thought Israel had gone too far in the hostilities in Gaza and that a comparable proportion favored a ban on weapons exports.

“These represent stances based on which the organization defines itself, acting purposefully to oppose the Israeli military exports in Britain,” officials wrote.

“If that PAG is banned, their profile may accidentally be enhanced, gaining backing among similarly minded members of the public who reject the British role in the Israel’s weapons trade.”

Additional Warnings

Experts said that the public disagreed with demands from the conservative press for harsh steps, such as a ban.

Further segments of the report referenced surveys saying the population had a “general lack of awareness” concerning Palestine Action.

The document said that “much of the UK population are presumably currently ignorant of the network and would continue unaware in the event of a ban or, should they learn, would continue generally untroubled”.

The outlawing under terrorism laws has sparked protests where numerous people have been detained for displaying signs in the streets stating “I oppose atrocities, I back the network”.

This briefing, which was a community impact assessment, said that a proscription under terrorism laws could heighten inter-community tensions and be seen as official partiality in toward Israel.

The document alerted officials and top advisers that outlawing could become “a trigger for significant controversy and criticism”.

Aftermath

Huda Ammori of Palestine Action, said that the document’s predictions had come true: “Understanding of the concerns and popularity of the group have increased dramatically. The ban has had the opposite effect.”

The senior official at the time, the minister, announced the outlawing in last month, shortly following the organization’s members allegedly committed acts at an air force station in the region. Officials stated the damage was substantial.

The chronology of the report demonstrates the ban was under consideration well before it was revealed.

Officials were advised that a outlawing might be seen as an assault on individual rights, with the experts saying that portions of government as well as the wider public may consider the measure as “a gradual extension of anti-terror laws into the domain of liberty and protest.”

Government Statements

A Home Office official stated: “Palestine Action has conducted an increasingly aggressive series including vandalism to Britain’s key installations, intimidation, and claimed attacks. These actions endangers the protection of the population at risk.

“Rulings on banning are not taken lightly. These are based on a comprehensive evidence-based system, with assistance from a wide range of advisers from various departments, the authorities and the MI5.”

An anti-terror official said: “Decisions relating to outlawing are a prerogative for the administration.

“In line with public expectations, counter-terrorism policing, alongside a selection of further organizations, regularly provide material to the department to aid their work.”

This briefing also revealed that the executive branch had been financing monthly polls of public strain related to the Middle East conflict.