.png)
Rebel Justice
What is justice? Who does it serve? Why should you care?
When we think about justice, we think about it as an abstract, something that happens to someone else, somewhere else. But justice and the law regulate every aspect of our interactions with each other, with organisations, and with the government.
We never think about it until it impacts our lives, or that of someone close.
Our guests are women with lived experience of the justice system whether as victims or women who have committed crimes; or people at the forefront of civic action who put their lives on the line to demand a better world..
We ask them to share their insight into how we might repair a broken and harmful system, with humanity and dignity.
We also speak with people who are in the heart of the justice system creating important change; climate activists, judges, barristers, human rights campaigners, mental health advocates, artists and healers.
Rebel Justice
Ep. 81: Part 2 - The Filton 24 & The Dangerous Precedent of Banning Palestine Action
When does protest become terrorism? In one of the most alarming developments in a generation, the UK government has prescribed Palestine Action under counter-terrorism legislation, placing a direct action group alongside neo-Nazi organisations and making it a criminal offence to express support for them.
This groundbreaking episode delves into the dangerous precedent being set as authorities weaponize anti-terror laws against those challenging state complicity in violence abroad. Through a powerful interview with Professor Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on Counterterrorism and Human Rights, we uncover how the UK's definition of terrorism dangerously stretches international standards by criminalizing property damage rather than limiting it to acts causing death or serious injury.
The stakes couldn't be higher. Over a single weekend, more than 500 people were arrested in London for expressing solidarity with Palestine Action—the largest mass arrest in over a decade. Meanwhile, in Gaza, Palestinians continue to endure bombardment, starvation, and displacement while UK-licensed arms flow to Israel despite evidence they may be used in war crimes.
We document the timeline of horror in Gaza since late 2024, explore the High Court challenge to the prescription, and examine what happens when states label political dissent as terrorism. Whether you agree with the tactics of direct action or not, this episode raises profound questions about civil liberties, democracy, and our collective responsibility when governments become complicit in atrocities abroad.
What does it mean for all of us when breaking a window becomes terrorism, but breaking international law does not? Listen now to understand one of the most significant threats to protest rights in recent memory.
Warning: this episode contains mention of torture, rape, murder, famine and genocide.
*This episode was recorded before the Filton 18 became the Filton 24*
Credits
Guest: Professor Ben Saul
Producers & Editors: Charlotte Janes, Nicola Rivosecchi
Soundtrack: Particles (Revo Main Version) by [Coma-Media]
Download Issue 14 of The View Magazine to read the full article here: https://theviewmag.org.uk/product/the-view-issue-14/
Subscribe to The View for just £20/year: 4 digital issues + 1 print edition.
Follow us on Instagram @the_view_magazines, and find us on X, LinkedIn, and Facebook.
For enquires, contact: press@theviewmagazine.org
For more unmissable content from The View sign up here
For more unmissable content from The View sign up here
Today, as I write this, it is the month of Ramadan, and we have witnessed Gaza being starved out for over two weeks, after a year and a half of ongoing genocide. Today, as I write this, the Israeli occupation forces launched airstrikes that murdered over 500 people in a single day, most of them children. Today, as I write this, the Knesset has said that the coming days will be like nothing ever seen before. Today I write this because we have allowed this to happen again and again and again, because our memory is fickle and our history is being written by the same people who have colonized and brutalized and murdered our communities for decades, for centuries, because we forget too easily and have allowed ourselves to be tied down by what they have told us is civilized and moral and right. Is this memory not familiar?
Host:You're listening to Rebel Justice, the podcast from the View Magazine. When we think about justice, we think about it as an abstract, something that happens to someone else somewhere else. But justice and the law regulate every aspect of our interactions with each other, with organisations and with the government. We never think about it until it impacts our lives or those of someone close. Our guests are women with lived experience of the justice system, whether as victims or women who have committed crimes. People at the forefront of civic action who put their lives on the line to demand a better world. We ask them to share their insight into how we might repair a broken and harmful system with humanity and dignity. We also speak with people who are in the heart of the justice system, creating important change Judges, barristers, human rights campaigners, mental health advocates, artists and healers. In last week's episode we spoke with Claire and Sukaina. Their daughters, zoe and Fatema Zainab, are part of the Filton 18 group. If you haven't listened to part one, go back and listen now.
Host:Today we're looking at one of the most alarming developments in the policing of protest in a generation the UK government's recent move to proscribe the direct action group Palestine Action under counter-terrorism legislation. The government claims Palestine Action has used tactics that resemble those of a so-called killer cult, but campaigners, lawyers and human rights groups have pushed back hard, calling this a dangerous assault on civil liberties, designed to silence dissent and criminalise solidarity. In this episode, we ask what does this prescription really mean? How does it fit into the wider use of anti-terror laws against protest movements, and what does it say about the state's response to those who challenge its complicity in global violence? We'll also be speaking with Professor Ben Saul, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms while Countering Terrorism. In this conversation, we'll find out about the history of the use of counter-terrorism laws and the impact of the prescription of Palestine action. To understand the stakes and why groups like Palestine Action exist, we need to step back and look at the bigger picture.
Host:The conflict between Israel and Palestine is not just about land or religion. It's a story of colonisation, displacement and resistance that stretches back over a century. In 1948, the State of Israel was established and over 75,000 Palestinians were expelled or fled from their homes, an event known by Palestinians as Nakba or catastrophe. Since then, millions of Palestinians have lived as refugees, in exile or under military occupation. Today, palestinians in the occupied West Bank live under a military regime that controls nearly every aspect of daily life movement, land access, housing and civil rights.
Host:In Gaza, over 2 million people have been under an Israeli-led blockade for nearly two decades, with devastating humanitarian consequences. Successive Israeli governments have pursued a policy of settlement expansion, building illegal Israeli-only communities on Palestinian land, a practice that's widely condemned by the international community, including the United Nations. Organizations including Amnesty International, human Rights Watch and the Israeli group Bet Salem have declared that Israel is practicing apartheid, a system of domination and systematic oppression of one racial or ethnic group over another. The situation escalated dramatically again in October 2023, when Hamas launched attacks on Israel, and Israel responded with an unprecedented assault on Gaza. Since then, tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed, including a high proportion of women and children. According to UN agencies, entire neighbourhoods have been flattened, access to food, water, electricity and healthcare has been cut off. While governments like the UK have condemned Hamas, they have continued to license arms sales to Israel, despite credible evidence from UN experts that these weapons may be used to commit war crimes.
Host:And that's the backdrop to Palestine Action, a group of UK-based activists who believe that civil disobedience is not only justified but necessary when democratic systems fail to stop complicity in crimes against humanity. Before we get to today's guests, we need to talk about the group at the centre of all of this Palestine Action. If you've heard of them, it might have been in headlines about red paint factory occupations or smashed windows, but who are they really, what do they want and why has the government now designated them a terrorist organisation? Palestine Action was founded in 2020 by a group of British activists who believe that traditional protest, like petitions, marches and lobbying, had failed to stop the UK's complicity in Israel's ongoing violence against Palestinians. Their core target, a company called Elbit Systems, Israel's largest arms manufacturer, with multiple factories and offices across the UK. Elbit makes drones, weapon systems and surveillance tech, much of it used by the Israeli military in Gaza and the West Bank.
Host:Palestine Action sees these sites as infrastructure for apartheid and war crimes. Their goal has been simple and unapologetic to shut them down. What sets Palestine Action apart is their use of direct action, deliberately disruptive, high-risk tactics intended to cause maximum disruption and visibility. Over the last four years, activists have occupied Elbit factories, climbing onto their roofs and halting operations, smashed windows, disabled machinery and spray-painted blood-red slogans, chained themselves to gates, blocked roads and poured paint over buildings, disrupted arms expos, corporate offices and even UK government contractors. They describe these actions as decommissioning not vandalism, but intervention. Their framing is clear If the government won't stop arms exports to Israel, then it's up to people to physically interrupt the supply chain.
Host:Since 2020, over 100 activists have been arrested and dozens charged, some with criminal damage, others under public order laws. But here's the twist In multiple trials, juries have acquitted Palestine action activists, accepting their defence that they were acting to prevent greater crimes, namely war crimes against Palestinians. In legal terms, this is called the lawful excuse defence, arguing that the harm caused by their actions was proportionate to the harm they were trying to prevent. These courtroom wins have become a rallying point for the movement. Proof, they argue, that public conscience can override state complicity. But now things have escalated. On July 19, 19th 2025, home Secretary Yvette Cooper officially prescribed Palestine Action as a terrorist organization under the Terrorism Act 2000. That means it is now a criminal offense, punishable by up to 14 years in prison, to either be a member of the group. Up to 14 years in prison to either be a member of the group, show public support, attend one of their events, or even wear or share their symbols or messages.
Host:The government claims the group is a cult-like organisation that uses criminal and violent tactics. Palestine Action, meanwhile, causes a political attack meant to silence not just them, but anyone who takes direct action against government-linked injustice. Alongside Palestine Action, the UK government prescribed two neo-Nazi groups in the form of the Maniacs Murder Club and the Russian Imperial Movement, calling into question the motives of the UK's leadership. According to the Global Network on Extremism and Technology, the Maniacs Murder Club first formed around 2017 and are run mainly by two young far-right extremists. The group instructs would-be members to participate in various degrees of offline criminality, including assault, murder and terrorism, to maintain their membership. The Russian Imperial Movement, also known as the RIM, is another white supremacist militant group that operates primarily within Russia and is seemingly attempting to create a new empire. It's fought alongside Russian soldiers during the ongoing invasion of Ukraine in an attempt to further its own ideological goals. According to the US government, rim gives people paramilitary-style training and previously encouraged radicalized members to carry out terrorist attacks in Sweden, bombing a cafe, a migrant center, as well as further attempted attacks on a campsite used to house refugees. United Nations experts warned by prescribing all three at the same time, the government risks misusing terrorism laws against Palestine action if authorities press ahead with prescribing them as a terrorist group.
Host:So how did we get here From direct action to terrorism charges, and what does this mean for protest, for democracy and for anyone who refuses to be complicit in war? In last week's episode, claire and Sukaina mentioned how MP John McDonnell has been fearless, listened to them and stood up and made statements about the Filton 18. When Palestine Action was prescribed in July 2025, it marked a sharp escalation in the criminalisation of protest, and it didn't go unnoticed in Parliament. One of the few voices to speak out publicly and consistently is John McDonnell, labour MP for Hayes and Harlington and former Shadow Chancellor under Jeremy Corbyn.
Host:Mcdonnell has been a vocal supporter of Palestinian rights for decades. He's marched, spoken at rallies and challenged his own party leadership for what he sees as moral cowardice in the face of Israeli aggression. He's also been clear non-violent protest should never be treated as terrorism. In the wake of the prescription, mcdonnell described the move as a dangerous precedent, one that threatens every person's right to resist injustice. He warned that we are witnessing a new phase of oppression, where counter-terror laws are no longer just used against violence, but against those who oppose it. Here is a clip of John from Middle East Eye.
John McDonnell:I've just come out of the House of Commons. Okay, the government rushed through a banning order prescribing Palestine action as a terrorist organization. They've linked them, they've put them in the same order as a terror group, a killer cult and a Russian what they call Russian liberation again terrorist organization. So what they're trying to do is portray Palestine action as though they're killers, as though they're terrorists threatening the lives of people. It's an absolute disgrace. This isn't the way you use legislation like this. If people have created criminal damage, well then they've got laws to prosecute them. We all know that when we go on demonstrations, you work on the basis if you can't do the time, don't do the crime, but you expect the law to be used against you in a way which is the norm. What they're doing here is prescribing the organisation. It's a terrorist organisation. So if me and you tomorrow say I actually think the prescription is wrong, we could serve up to 14 years in prison. That's how bad it is.
John McDonnell:But they can't get away with this, can they? I don't think so. It's gone off to the House of Lords. We'll see what comes back, but there's a legal challenge tomorrow and what we'll have to do now. It's gone through the house of commons. Now we're going to have to pin them down about how this is interpreted I'm, I'm really worried we haven't seen assault on civil liberties like this, maybe for a generation he's also thrown his support behind the filth in 18.
Host:McDonnell has spoken out in their defense, raising concerns in parliament and beyond about the disproportionate charges that they face. He's pointed to their use of the lawful excuse defence, arguing that the actions they took were a proportionate response to the UK's complicity in alleged war crimes. McDonnell himself has even been questioned by police after attending a pro-Palestine protest, but he hasn't backed down. He says that when the state begins to use the language and tools of counter-terrorism to silence civil obedience, it's not just protest that's under threat, it's democracy itself. John McDonnell has been a fierce critic of how anti-terrorism laws are being used to clamp down on protest, drawing on his own experience and deep commitment to civil liberties here in the UK.
Host:But this isn't just a national issue. Use of terrorism legislation against protest movements is a global concern, one that reaches into international law and the human rights frameworks the UK has signed up to. In May 2024, a group of UN human rights experts, including Professor Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on Counterterrorism and Human Rights, issued a formal letter to the UK government. They raised serious concerns about the use of terrorism legislation against Palestine action activists, including the Filton 18. Hi, ben, we're so glad to have you here today. Would you mind starting off by telling listeners a little bit about yourself, your work and your background?
Professor Ben Saul:So I'm Ben Saul, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism, and my role is really to monitor compliance with human rights by 193 countries worldwide, plus about 46 United Nations entities that are involved in counterterrorism activities globally as well. So we do that through country fact-finding missions, annual reporting to the General Assembly and Security Council and what we call diplomatic communications, which are letters we send to governments alleging violations of human rights while countering terrorism. So they could be individual cases or new legislation that governments are applying to deal with the threat of terrorism.
Host:Cool, thank you. So, starting off, how would you say the UK's use of anti-terrorism laws compares with international standards on human rights and proportionality, both historically and maybe at present?
Professor Ben Saul:So the United Kingdom is a country which in many ways has pioneered the use of counterterrorism laws over many, many years. I mean firstly in the colonial era, in policing the colonies way back to the 1920s onwards, but then subsequently in Ireland and Northern Ireland, and then these days, of course, in the last quarter century or so, since 9-11, and the attacks on London of 7-7 has developed a lot of legal tools to deal with terrorism, and that's been very influential because other common law countries around the world have often replicated some of those measures. So it includes, obviously, a definition of terrorism, very wide-ranging criminal offences relating to terrorism, things like what used to be called control orders, now T-PIMs, which are restrictive measures to prevent people getting involved in terrorism. The PREVENT scheme, which involves public authorities and health professionals and teachers reporting on risks of radicalization amongst their clients. So the UK has done a lot and of course it's participated in armed conflicts against terrorist groups abroad as well, in Afghanistan, iraq, syria and so on.
Professor Ben Saul:The UK has got a long tradition of respect for civil liberties.
Professor Ben Saul:It's got a modern Human Rights Act. It's governed by the European Convention on Human Rights, but nonetheless, you know it has gone too far in quite a few areas, as unfortunately too many countries have done over the years, and there's been a lot of pushback on that at the domestic level over the years. And there's been a lot of pushback on that at the domestic level. There's been pushback sometimes by the independent reviewer of terrorism laws in the UK and pushback in the courts as lawyers and people affected by these sometimes excessive powers challenge them and sometimes sometimes get favorable judgments. I mean early on, of course, there was the Belmarsh case where the UK had essentially indefinitely administratively detained foreign suspected terrorists who couldn't be deported because it was unsafe to send them back to another country and couldn't be prosecuted because there wasn't enough evidence for criminal trial. So that was challenged in the courts and was ultimately determined that those measures were not consistent with human rights law. And that's when the UK revised its position and created a more human rights compliant response.
Host:Thank you. Maybe it's worth almost for some listeners to even get a definition of what terrorism is.
Professor Ben Saul:Yeah, look, I don't have it here in front of me. But the definition in the UK is roughly similar to some elements of the international best practice standards and European Union standards. So that involves certain kinds of usually criminal acts which are committed with the intention of intimidating the population or part of it, or coercing or compelling a government to do something or to refrain from doing something, and in addition all of that has to be done for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, ideological or racial cause or objective. So they're quite complex offences, because normally you know a crime, you've got to prove that somebody intended to commit some harmful physical act you have to do that with terrorism but in addition you've got to show that it was done to intimidate or coerce or, and on top of that, was done for a political, religious etc. Purpose.
Host:Thank you. So you mentioned previously some of the pushbacks regarding the UK recently. To what extent is the UK stretching the legal definition ?
Professor Ben Saul:So Palestine Action is a so-called direct action organization protesting Israeli policies and practices in Palestine, particularly recently in relation to the Gaza conflict. And one of the things about the UK definition is that it covers not only intentional killing or infliction of personal injury but also covers certain kinds of serious damage to property, you know, public or private property. And so that last bit of the definition is what has been used in the policing of protest by Palestine action. So there've been some cases where there have been alleged break-ins to weapons factories and damage done to equipment in those factories. More recently there was trespass on a Royal Air Force base and damage done by throwing paint and so on on military aircraft. And so in these incidents, you know, there wasn't, generally speaking, intentional, you know, killing or infliction of personal injury for a terrorist purpose.
Professor Ben Saul:It was really, you know, acts to disrupt what the protesters say are activities which are supportive of the war, israel's war in Gaza, which we know involves some pretty serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, certainly by the Israeli forces. But part of the cause of the protesters here is, they say, the UK is complicit or engaged in supporting those Israeli activities. Now, regardless whether that's true, the concern here is that terrorism laws are being used against people who are exercising the right of protest, to be sure in a way which is unlawful. I mean, if you trespass on a military base or you damage property, I mean those are you know, it's well known that those are ordinary criminal offences and if you do that, you know you should expect to get charged with something for that. But it shouldn't be terrorism charges, because terrorism is certainly, according to international standards, best practice, international standards. Terrorism should be reserved for violence which deliberately inflicts death or serious personal injury. It shouldn't cover mere damage to property.
Host:Thank you. So, going off of that, would you say, then the thresholds the government must meet under international law to justify the prescription have been met.
Professor Ben Saul:So I think there are a couple of issues here. One is that the UK's definition of terrorism generally is too broad because it captures harm to property which, according at least to best practice international standards, that shouldn't be covered. It's a little bit complicated because there is no binding international legal definition of terrorism. Countries have not been able to agree over the years over about a century of trying on what terrorism is. But at the same time we do have some very authoritative guidance which has been given by the Security Council, human rights bodies, my own mandate, and reflected in a bunch of international counterterrorism treaties on specific things like protection of civil aviation and shipping and so on, that terrorism should be reserved for the infliction of death or serious personal injury and shouldn't cover mere property damage.
Professor Ben Saul:At the same time I would say and this is certainly the position I've put to the UK government and the submissions I'm making in the judicial review of the prescription of Palestine action in the UK courts that the ban and its consequences appear to disproportionately restrict or limit a series of fundamental human rights and that is illegal under international law. And that's because it you know the by characterizing forms of legitimate protest as essentially terrorism, it's impermissibly interfering in the right to freedom of opinion and expression, freedoms of assembly and association, and those are obligations that the UK must respect under international law. In human rights law you can of course limit free expression and freedom to protest in certain circumstances if it's necessary to protect the rights of others or to ensure the safety of the public and so on. But those restrictions have to be strictly necessary and proportionate in pursuit of those other legitimate security or other public interest aims. And the problem here, I think, is a number of problems.
Professor Ben Saul:One is the definition of terrorism is too broad and that's enabled the excessive ban on Palestine action in the first place because if you're not killing and injuring people, you know then as a group you shouldn't be banned as terrorist full stop. So immediately you've got a disproportionate restriction there. But secondly, when an organization is prescribed under UK law, it then activates a whole series of criminal offenses relating to engagement with that organisation. So you know, expressing forms of support for that organisation then becomes a crime under UK law and that itself is also disproportionate. Because if you hold up a sign saying you know I support Palestine action, that doesn't mean you're supporting killing or injuring people in order to somehow advance the cause of Palestine. You know Palestine action is a diverse and plural group. Most of its members aren't committing any kind of criminal offences at all, let alone killing or injuring people, and so it becomes a disproportionate restriction on the rights of anybody who supports Palestine Action's cause in order to, if you criminalise their activities in that way.
Professor Ben Saul:Also, you know I would say that things like showing support for Palestine action when you're not engaging in any harmful activity really has no proximate causal connection to the eventual commission of terrorist. You know genuinely terrorist violence by anyone else in Palestine action. So a peaceful protester on the streets of London holding up a sign that has no connection whatsoever to whether anybody will be killed or injured in the cause of Palestine action. So I think the problem here is that there are so many points at which these measures taken are disproportionate that you add it all together it's very hard to see how this could in any way be lawful restrictions on expression and protest in the UK and not violations of the UK's international obligations.
Host:Thank you. Yeah, I suppose we definitely saw that over the weekend in London I think the highest number of arrests in a day in over 10 years just from people supporting Palestine Action. So obviously, on top of what you said about the impact on civil liberties, do you have any concerns that perhaps this kind of use of anti-terrorism legislation could even weaken counter-terrorism ?
Professor Ben Saul:It could certainly well.
Professor Ben Saul:We know that, generally speaking, state violations of human rights in the name of countering terrorism not only are you only are immoral and wrongful and illegal violations of human rights. They are also counterproductive from a security standpoint because they alienate significant sections of the population. It makes people less likely to want to cooperate with law enforcement authorities to report or share intelligence on genuine terrorist threats. It can fuel grievances that can lead to more extreme action in some cases as well. You know all points made in the United Nations' own global counterterrorism strategy, which the UK agreed to back in 2006, which say you know you have to avoid state violations of human rights if you want to effectively prevent and counterterrorism of concern. Because you know steps like this then have a habit of being precedents for taking action against other movements as well.
Professor Ben Saul:I mean, if you think of climate change activism or environmental protests, you know, which also use sometimes these sort of direct action or civil disobedience tactics. But most people, you know, intuitively or from a common sense standpoint, would not think of these actions as terrorist in a million years. I mean, yes, they may be breaking the criminal law, in some cases by damaging property, but they're not in the ballpark of terrorism. I mean terrorist laws are designed for al-Qaeda, 9-11, isis, these really extreme threats which threaten mass casualty attacks on the civilian population. I mean, this is nothing like what Palestine action or climate protest is about.
Host:You mentioned earlier the letter written by yourself and a group of UN experts in May 24. Would you be open to discussing more about that? What was said in the letter?
Professor Ben Saul:Yeah, so the letter is public on the United Nations database and I mean really it just talks about the issues. I've already discussed Our concern that mere damage to property should not be captured by counterterrorism laws, whether you're seeking to charge them as offences. Or in the case of the protesters covered in that early letter and this was before Palestine Action was prescribed indicating that there's a terrorist connection in sentencing. So terrorism charges were not brought. But the significance of indicating there's a terrorism connection in sentencing is that it can aggravate the penalties you get for other you know, ordinary criminal law offenses, and that is equally inappropriate if the underlying conduct doesn't fit the definition, or what should be the definition, of terrorism, properly defined according to international standards.
Host:Thank you. Are there any legal safeguards, domestically or internationally, that should prevent the misuse of terrorism laws against protesters, and if so, do you think they're working?
Professor Ben Saul:Well, certainly there's current litigation in the UK courts challenging the Palestine action ban. The lawyers in individual criminal cases of course I'm sure will also be raising those kinds of concerns. Certainly the judicial review proceeding of the ban on Palestine action is going ahead towards the end of this year. On the ground also, the question is is the ban and its consequences proportionate restrictions on human rights under you know the UK Human Rights Act so that you know that case will play out over the course of this year? And certainly you know the UK courts are independent, robust. The UK's got a rule of law culture but you know at the end of the day.
Professor Ben Saul:Of course you know the Human Rights Act is not something which can override legislative choices by parliament. So judges can certainly indicate that there might be non-compliance, but the way the UK Human Rights Act works is the Parliament can always maintain laws which do infringe on human rights. At the end of the day Then the backstop of course is the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, where you know that's their decisions are binding. So you know there's the prospect of further litigation there if the UK courts don't give a result which is objectively human rights compliant. And there have been cases historically where Strasbourg has given a different answer to the House of Lords or now the Supreme Court in the UK. So this, unfortunately, will take some time to play out. That's no comfort to the 500 people plus who were arrested last weekend for peacefully protesting, but hopefully those mechanisms will bear fruit.
Host:Thank you. So you mentioned earlier how the UK historically almost paved the way for the use of anti-terrorism law. Could this trend have a chilling effect on other countries who might follow in the UK's steps?
Professor Ben Saul:There's certainly a kind of growing climate of authoritarianism in many, many countries. You know some backsliding on human rights and democratic freedoms. It's being enabled by geopolitical developments elsewhere, including in the United States, and, as I mentioned, the UK's approach can be very influential in shaping how other countries approach these issues. It's no surprise that in a bunch of Western democracies there have been clampdowns on speech critical of Israel under the guise of, you know, some of that speech being anti-Semitic, when it's, you know, genuinely not, and so you know this has been a very politicized area which has not been very helpful to the protection of fundamental human rights.
Host:Thank you. And then, finally, what reforms would you recommend to prevent the abuse of counterterrorism powers whilst maintaining public safety?
Professor Ben Saul:Well, I mean in terms of the issues we've been discussing. I certainly think the definition of terrorism should be tightened to exclude or at least substantially limit the extent to which terrorism covers harm to property. It's certainly true that under some international conventions damage to property is included, but the thresholds are very, very high. I mean it has to involve extensive destruction or major economic loss to, you know, major public infrastructure. It certainly shouldn't cover, you know, much smaller scale damage to property, as in the, you know, the Palestine Action type cases.
Professor Ben Saul:Also, I'd encourage the UK to think about narrowing or tightening some of the offences related to terrorist organisations and also sharpen the procedure for designating or prescribing organizations as terrorist in the first place because the definitions used in relation to what is a terrorist organization it's not just the terrorism definition, it's also the process for deciding and the criteria for deciding what organisations fit that profile. They too are a bit vague, overbroad and can lead to excessive bans on organisations where it's not genuinely justified.
Host:Thank you so much for joining us today.
Professor Ben Saul:My pleasure good to be with you.
Host:Here's what the letter makes clear 1. Non-violent protest is not terrorism. The experts warn that treating peaceful civil disobedience as a terror offence risks breaching international law. 2. The UK is bound by international human rights standards, including the right to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly. 3. Disproportionate charges could have a chilling effect on all protest, not just actions against Elbit systems or UK arms exports to Israel. 4. States must not criminalise political dissent, especially when it's grounded in opposition to alleged war crimes. And five experts ask the UK government to justify its actions and call for greater transparency, accountability and restraint. The letter is a stark reminder. When a democracy starts punishing protest like terrorism, it doesn't just violate rights, it erodes the rule of law.
Host:The Filton 18 were arrested on November 17th 2024. They were arrested for protests trying to end the genocide in Palestine, but since this day, Palestinians have been enduring relentless. Since this day, Palestinians have been enduring relentless, escalating horror, Whilst the protesters have sat behind bars. This is what has been happening in Palestine Since late 2024, thousands of Palestinians, including children, journalists, health workers and displaced civilians, were detained under administrative detention, often held without charge. Testimonies from these people include waterboarding, beatings, electric shocks, dogs being released on detainees, enforced nudity or diapers, prolonged blindfolding, sleep and food depri. Schools were sheltering over 415,000 internally displaced Palestinians. Nearly 2 million people from Gaza were internally displaced and more than 100,000 forcibly moved from North Gaza since October 6th. In December, four infants froze to death amid insufficient heating in displacement camps. Shelters were destroyed by winds and rain across Gaza, impacting between 110,000 and 135,000 tents acting between 110,000 and 135,000 tents. In December, 16 Palestinian-owned buildings were destroyed, displacing families, including children. In 2024, the total demolitions reached 1,762, displacing over 4,253 Palestinians, including 1,712 children.
Host:On 5 December, a 56-day siege on the Jenin camp began. A further siege on the Tolkham camp meant that, in total, 33,000 Palestinians were displaced. Businesses and infrastructure were also destroyed, killing dozens, including pregnant women and children. On the 7th, 12th, 20th and 23rd of December, Israeli strikes on the Nusayrat camp killed 26 to 33 civilians per strike. Camp killed 26 to 33 civilians per strike, many of whom were children, and injuring dozens more. Between December 15th and 17th, barbed wire blocked access across H2, affecting 2,500 residents. School attendance dropped 25% and access to health clinics was cut off. Arrests and assaults followed protests. Between December and early 2025, Israeli settlers carried out over 130 attacks per month in the West Bank, burning homes and vehicles and assaulting civilians. In one incident on December 10th, Israeli settlers ran over a 12-year-old boy.
Host:The Operation Iron Wall raid in Jenin in January displaced over 75% of the 13,400 residents. At least 12 Palestinians were killed and 40 were injured, including medical staff. The Gaza ministry reports that between 125 and 132 people were killed during an airstrike between the 4th and 5th of January near the Al Amal hospital, including the deaths of a newborn baby near the Al Amal Hospital, including the deaths of a newborn baby, an infant and medical staff. On the 9th and 27th of January, further airstrikes killed children and families, despite the ceasefire period. Between January and March, Israeli authorities demolished 431 Palestinian structures. Israeli authorities demolished 431 Palestinian structures, displacing 554 people, including 263 children, and over 102 Palestinians were killed in the West Bank. By March, Israel had blocked humanitarian aid entries at major crossings for 16 consecutive days. They cut electricity, causing water shortages and multiple deaths due to a lack of medical supplies and fuel. On March 15th, Israeli strikes targeted a team from the UK-based Al-Hayr Foundation in northern Gaza, killing eight people, including volunteers and independent journalists. Israel claimed they struck militants operating a drone, but the foundation denies any militant activity.
Host:Between March 18th and 19th, Israeli forces stormed refugee camps. Israeli forces stormed refugee camps, killing two Palestinians. In Jenin, over 600 residential units were destroyed and 66 more slated for demolition. Between 11th and 16th March, Israeli forces shot major checkpoints, leaving Palestinians stranded for hours, and beatings were reported at checkpoints. On a single-day attack on 18th March, at least 413 people were killed, 174 of these were children. This raised the total number of Palestinian deaths in the month of March alone to 591, with 1,000 wounded. At least two hospitals were struck. On the 23rd of March, Israeli forces reportedly shot and killed five Palestinian medics from the Palestine Red Crescent Society whilst they were trying to provide aid.
Host:As of April, roughly 40,000 Palestinians remained displaced on the West Bank. During this month, two Palestinian boys aged 12 and 17 years old were shot and killed. Additional live rounds caused further deaths and injuries. On April 1st, seven World Centre kitchen aid workers are killed. The Gaza ministry reports that 71 people were killed on this day. Continued airstrikes between the 2nd and 7th of April killed between 46 and 54 Palestinians per day.
Host:By the end of April, thousands of Palestinians are suffering from thalassemia. Due to a lack of medication, Cases of hepatitis and meningitis are also surging. On May 30th, Israeli forces evacuated Al-Ordeh Hospital, the last functioning hospital in northern Gaza. Aid deliveries are blocked and civilians are left without care. In May, the IPC warns that Gaza is entering a worst-case famine. Malnutrition rates surge. The World Health Organization and the UN call for immediate intervention by July 2025, over 5,800 children are diagnosed with acute malnutrition in Gaza. This is triple the levels recorded in February. Starvation-related deaths on one day alone exceed 175 people, 93 of which were children, as of 31 July. In the past 24 hours, 111 Palestinians have been killed and 820 were injured were injured.
Host:On the 3rd of August, Israeli forces opened fire on civilians at the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation food distribution site. 27 were killed and six more die from starvation. Over 1,400 Palestinians have reportedly been killed and almost 4,900 injured seeking aid here between the 27th of May and the 21st of July. Many of these deaths occurred at site entrances. On the 4th of August, sources at Gaza's hospitals told Al Jazeera that 56 people, including 27 aid seekers, had been killed in Israeli attacks since dawn On the same day. A healthcare worker at Al-Aqsa Hospital was reported to have died after an air-dropped aid pallet fell on his tent. Gaza is a very small and densely populated place, and if these pallets were dropped in Israeli controlled areas, then it's very difficult and dangerous for Palestinians to go and take these items.
Host:What you have just heard is sickening and inhumane. But the worst part, this isn't even a fraction of the number of stories, torture and death. If you follow any online live news thread, stories like the ones you've heard come in every single hour. Over 60,000 Palestinian people have been killed and 145,870 others injured in Israeli attacks on Gaza since October 7th 2023. This includes tens of thousands of women and children from ongoing bombardments, starvation, blocked aid and collapsed healthcare. 90% of health facilities are damaged, water supplies have collapsed and only partial fuel aid is reaching hospitals. Camps report beatings, humiliation, torture, documented cases of rape and strip searches by Israeli forces in detention centres. Reports from UN special rapporteurs describe widespread abusive practices. An ambulance driver, Walid Khalil, described electric shocks, stress positions, amputations and deaths in Israeli detention camps. He also detailed sexual violence claims, including rape with objects and by dogs. A UN investigation was denied by Israel. Witness accounts describe Palestinians being used as human shields in Gaza.
Host:In a major decision on July 30th, the High Court ruled that the prescription of Palestine Action should be reviewed. Judge Martin Chamberlain granted permission for Huda Amori, who helped found Palestine Action in 2020, to bring a judicial review saying prescription amounted to a disproportionate interference with her and others' right to freedom of expression. Lawyers for the group's co-founder have argued that the ban breaches the right to free speech and has acted like a gag on legitimate protest. The government says the ban is justified because it narrowly targets a group that was organising serious criminality. In his ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain said the ban might conflict with rights to free speech and the Home Secretary could have consulted Palestine Action before going ahead, but the judge refused an appeal by the group to temporarily lift the ban and it remains prescribed ahead of a full review of the Home Secretary's decisions at the High Court. Over three days in November, Lawyers for the government were denied permission to appeal against Wednesday's court ruling.
Host:The UK's terrorism laws focus on banning groups that use serious violence to further a cause, but the definition also allows ministers to outlaw organisations that cause serious criminal damage. Palestine Action is the first group to be prescribed under that part of the definition. Some 200 people have been arrested on suspicion of publicly protesting support for Palestine Action since it was banned, including an 83-year-old priest and a man holding a private eye cartoon, as mentioned in the interview with Professor Ben Saul, over the weekend, London saw the largest mass arrest by the Metropolitan Police in over 10 years 532 people were detained during a demonstration in Parliament Square organised by Defend Our Juries in support of the band group. Palestine Action. Police confirmed that 522 of those arrests were for displaying an item in support of a prescribed organisation, with bail conditions barring many from attending any future protests linked to Palestine action. Unusually, the majority of those arrested 348 people were over the age of 50. For perspective, in the entire year ending March 2025, just 232 people were arrested in the UK for terrorist-related activity.
Host:The UN's High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, has warned that prescribing Palestine action under terrorism laws risks criminalising non-violent protest and misuses the gravity and impact of terrorism by expanding its definition to include actions like property damage that fall short of international standards for terrorist acts property damage that falls short of international standards for terrorist acts. It's a stark example of how quickly counter-terrorism powers can be turned on political dissent and of the scale of resistance still willing to face them. In this episode, we've looked at what happens when protest is reframed as terrorism, when acts of civil disobedience are met not with debate but with prescription orders and the threat of 14 years in prison. At the heart of all of this are people like the Filton 18, young people who took action against war and now face prison. Whether you agree with their methods or not, the use of counter-terror laws to silence political dissent should concern all of us, Because today it's Palestine action. Tomorrow it could be you or anyone who dares to resist.
Host:If you want to support the Filton 18, you'll find links in the show notes. If you want to support the Filton 18, you'll find links in the show notes. You've been listening to Rebel Justice. If you'd like to support our work and receive four digital editions and one print issue a year, subscribe to the View for just £20. Make sure to follow us on our social media. We're on Instagram, @the_view_ magazines, and you can also find us on LinkedIn X and TikTok. If you'd like to reach out to us directly, you can email inquiries to us at press@ theviewmagazine. org. Please share this story.