Banning Palestine Action may be ‘escalation too far', says Labour peer
Plans to ban protest group Palestine Action would mark a very serious step that may go too far, a former shadow attorney general has said.
Baroness Shami Chakrabarti told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that it is 'one thing' to be a threat to property, or to be a nuisance, but it is 'another thing altogether' for a whole group to be proscribed as terrorists.
She said: 'From what I can tell, this is a militant protest group that engages in direct action and that includes criminality, no question, but to elevate that to terrorism so anybody who attends a meeting, or who promotes the organisation, or is loosely affiliated with it, is branded a terrorist – that is a serious escalation I think.'
The former director of the Liberty human rights group added: 'No doubt the Home Secretary will come to Parliament today and she will explain her reasoning and announce what she is actually going to do.
'I think this is a very serious step and I would share the concerns of Amnesty International, of Liberty, my former group, and others that this may be an escalation too far.'
The Labour peer's concerns come as Home Secretary Yvette Cooper will update Parliament on Monday on the Government's plan to ban Palestine Action following the group's vandalism of two planes at an RAF base.
The group posted footage online showing two people inside the base at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on Friday morning.
The clip shows one person riding an electric scooter up to an Airbus Voyager air-to-air refuelling tanker and appearing to spray paint into its jet engine.
The incident is being investigated by counter-terror police.
Meanwhile, a protest in support of Palestine Action is due to take place in London on Monday.
The group posted on X that the protest location has moved to Trafalgar Square after the Metropolitan Police banned action from taking place at the Houses of Parliament.
It comes as Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said he was 'shocked and frustrated' at the protest supporting the 'organised extremist criminal group' as the force imposed an exclusion zone around Westminster.
He said that until the group is proscribed, the Met has 'no power in law' to prevent the protest taking place, adding that breaches of the law would be 'dealt with robustly'.
In a statement on Sunday, Sir Mark said: 'I'm sure many people will be as shocked and frustrated as I am to see a protest taking place tomorrow in support of Palestine Action.
The act of vandalism committed at RAF Brize Norton is disgraceful.
Our Armed Forces represent the very best of Britain and put their lives on the line for us every day.
It is our responsibility to support those who defend us.
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 20, 2025
'This is an organised extremist criminal group, whose proscription as terrorists is being actively considered.
'Members are alleged to have caused millions of pounds of criminal damage, assaulted a police officer with a sledgehammer and last week claimed responsibility for breaking into an airbase and damaging aircraft.
'The right to protest is essential and we will always defend it but actions in support of such a group go beyond what most would see as legitimate protest.'
A spokesperson for Palestine Action previously accused the UK of failing to meet its obligation to prevent or punish genocide.
The spokesperson said: 'When our Government fails to uphold their moral and legal obligations, it is the responsibility of ordinary citizens to take direct action. The terrorists are the ones committing a genocide, not those who break the tools used to commit it.'
Cabinet minister Jonathan Reynolds said he could not rule out the possibility of a foreign power being behind Palestine Action.
The Business and Trade Secretary told the BBC's Sunday With Laura Kuenssberg: 'It is extremely concerning they gained access to that base and the Defence Secretary is doing an immediate review of how that happened.
'The actions that they undertook at Brize Norton were also completely unacceptable and it's not the first. It's the fourth attack by that group on a key piece of UK defence infrastructure.'
The Home Secretary has the power to proscribe an organisation under the Terrorism Act of 2000 if she believes it is 'concerned in terrorism'.
Proscription will require Ms Cooper to lay an order in Parliament, which must then be debated and approved by both MPs and peers.
Some 81 organisations have been proscribed under the 2000 Act, including Islamist terrorist groups such as Hamas and al Qaida, far-right groups such as National Action, and Russian private military company the Wagner Group.
On Sunday, former justice secretary Lord Charlie Falconer said vandalising aircraft at RAF Brize Norton would not solely provide legal justification for proscribing the group.
He told Sky News's Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips: 'I am not aware of what Palestine Action has done beyond the painting of things on the planes in Brize Norton, they may have done other things I didn't know.
'But generally, that sort of demonstration wouldn't justify proscription so there must be something else that I don't know about.'
But former Scottish first minister Humza Yousaf said the Government was 'abusing' anti-terror laws against pro-Palestine activists, as tens of thousands of protesters marched in London on Saturday.
Belonging to or expressing support for a proscribed organisation, along with a number of other actions, are criminal offences carrying a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison.
The Campaign Against Antisemitism welcomed the news that Ms Cooper intended to proscribe Palestine Action, saying: 'Nobody should be surprised that those who vandalised Jewish premises with impunity have now been emboldened to sabotage RAF jets.'
Former home secretary Suella Braverman also said it was 'absolutely the correct decision'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News
35 minutes ago
- Sky News
Palestine Action to be proscribed - but what does that mean?
Palestine Action faces being proscribed as a terror group after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton and damaged two military aircraft. It was the latest law broken by the activist group. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said they are also alleged to have caused millions of pounds of criminal damage and assaulted a police officer with a sledgehammer. He said he was "shocked and frustrated" to learn that a protest in support of the group was being planned on Monday, but that the force had "no power in law" to prevent it. The group's proscription, however, would change that. But what is proscription, what effect does it have, and how many proscribed organisations are there? What is proscription? Proscription is the banning of an organisation based on an assessment that it commits or participates in, prepares for, promotes or encourages, or is otherwise concerned in terrorism, the Home Office says. 1:49 The home secretary can choose to proscribe an organisation if it is found to do any of the following: • Commits or participates in acts of terrorism • Prepares for terrorism • Promotes or encourages terrorism (including the unlawful glorification of terrorism); or, • Is otherwise concerned in terrorism. Any move to proscribe the group must be debated and approved by MPs and peers. When deciding to proscribe an organisation, the government takes into account: • The nature and scale of an organisation's activities • The specific threat that it poses to the UK • The specific threat that it poses to British nationals overseas • The extent of the organisation's presence in the UK • The need to support other members of the international community in the global fight against terrorism. What does proscribing a group do? It makes it illegal to show support for the proscribed group, with any offences punishable by a maximum of 14 years in prison. 2:45 Specifically, it is a criminal offence to: • Belong to a proscribed organisation • Invite support for a proscribed organisation • Recklessly express support for a proscribed organisation • Arrange a meeting in support of a proscribed organisation • Wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation • Publish an image of an article such as a flag or logo in the same circumstances. The last two offences are less severe and punishable by up to six months in prison and/or a fine not exceeding £5,000. How many proscribed organisations are there? There are 81 organisations proscribed by the UK government under the Terrorism Act 2000, not including 14 organisations in Northern Ireland such as the Irish Republican Army (IRA) that were proscribed under previous legislation. The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is on the proscribed list and the most recent addition is The Terrorgram collective - an online transnational network of extreme right-wing terrorists which the government says wants to bring about the collapse of Western democracy and a "race war". You can see the full list by clicking here. Can a proscribed group be taken off the list? The group or someone deemed to be "affected" by a proscription can submit a written application to the home secretary requesting that they consider taking them off the list. If the application is refused, the applicant can appeal to the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, which allows an appeal if it considers that the home secretary's decision to refuse de-proscription was "flawed".
Times
36 minutes ago
- Times
BBC bosses back Martine Croxall over ‘pregnant people' correction
BBC bosses have backed a television presenter who corrected the phrase 'pregnant people' to 'women' while broadcasting live, in what has been welcomed as a rejection of gender-neutral language. Martine Croxall, 56, was citing a study about protecting vulnerable people in hot weather and, after reading out the report's phrasing, immediately rolled her eyes and changed the wording to 'women'. 'Malcolm Mistry, who was involved in the research, says that the aged, pregnant people … women … and those with pre-existing health conditions need to take precautions,' she said. JK Rowling was among those to support the presenter, calling Croxall 'her new favourite BBC presenter' on X, and the former Wimbledon champion Martina Navratilova also backed her. Croxall added: 'A huge thank you to everyone who has chosen to follow me today for whatever reason. It's been quite a ride.' She has gained almost 50,000 followers on the social media platform since the incident on Sunday afternoon. BBC bosses are also understood to have been 'intensely relaxed' about the wording amid concerns from some staff that Croxall may have faced disciplinary action. Last year Justin Webb, a presenter of Today on Radio 4, was found to have partially breached BBC guidelines over the way in which he described a transgender woman in a debate about chess. Justin Webb was sanctioned by the BBC over an incident on Today on Radio 4 BBC Webb was told that he was at fault for describing the transgender woman as 'in other words, male' during a debate in August 2023 about guidelines issued by the international chess federation about whether men have an advantage in the game. • BBC calls in expert over breakfast show 'bullying' row But the BBC's position appears to have shifted since Webb was sanctioned. Following Sunday's broadcast, bosses are understood to have checked in with Croxall in a supportive way. 'It's a real cultural moment,' said one fellow BBC presenter, who said that there is a groundswell of support internally for using 'honest language'. Samir Shah is chairman of the BBC MICHAEL LECKIE FOR THE SUNDAY TIMES CULTURE They are said to have the support of Samir Shah, the BBC chairman. He is thought to have been dismayed by the ruling surrounding the Today incident, which took place several months before he joined the corporation. The shift is said to have been underpinned by the Supreme Court ruling in April, which found that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex. In a statement at the time, the BBC said that it was assessing how to implement the ruling into its editorial guidelines. 'In our news reporting, we always aim to deal with issues fairly and impartially, and this is informed by our editorial guidelines,' a spokesman said. 'BBC News is assessing the ruling to consider any updates which might need to be made to the style guide as a result.' The BBC News style guide encourages 'appropriate language' when reporting on a person's gender, including using whichever gender pronouns are 'preferred by the person in question, unless there are editorial reasons not to do so'.
Evening Standard
37 minutes ago
- Evening Standard
Esther Rantzen speaks of ‘enormous relief' after MPs backed assisted dying Bill
Last week, Dame Esther told BBC Radio 4's Today: 'People who are adamantly opposed to this Bill, and they have a perfect right to oppose it, will try and stop it going through the Lords, but the Lords themselves, their duty is to make sure that law is actually created by the elected chamber, which is the House of Commons, who have voted this through.'
