UK's Palestine Action bids to pause government ban
British lawmakers decided to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organization this week, in response to its activists breaking into a military base and damaging two planes in protest at what it says is Britain's support for Israel.
Proscription would officially designate Palestine Action as a terrorist organization, on par with ISIS or al-Qaeda, making it a crime to support or belong to the groups.
Palestine Action has increasingly targeted Israel-linked companies in Britain with direct action, but critics of the government's move say property damage should not be equated with terrorism.
Huda Ammori, who helped found Palestine Action in 2020, asked London's High Court to pause the group's proscription – which comes into force at midnight – pending a full legal challenge due to be heard later this month.
Her lawyer Raza Husain told London's High Court: 'This is the first time in our history that a direct action, civil disobedience group which does not advocate for violence has been sought to be proscribed as terrorists.'
Husain described the government's decision as 'an ill-considered, discriminatory, authoritarian abuse of statutory power that is alien to the basic tradition of the common law.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arab News
37 minutes ago
- Arab News
UK foreign secretary discusses ties with Kuwaiti crown prince, prime minister
LONDON: UK Foreign Secretary David Lammy met separately with Kuwaiti Prime Minister Sheikh Ahmad Abdullah Al-Ahmad Al-Sabah and Crown Prince Sheikh Sabah Khaled Al-Hamad Al-Sabah during his visit to Kuwait. Lammy and the Kuwaiti officials discussed on Sunday ways to enhance relations between London and Kuwait. Kuwait's Ambassador to the UK Bader Al-Munaikh, UK Ambassador to Kuwait Belinda Lewis, Kuwait's Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for Europe Sadeq Marafi, and Kuwait's Minister of Foreign Affairs Abdullah Al-Yahya attended the meetings. Lammy visited the Middle East over the weekend, landing first in Syria and meeting with Syrian President Ahmed Al-Sharaa and Foreign Minister Asaad Al-Shibani. The foreign secretary is the first British official to visit Damascus in 14 years.
Asharq Al-Awsat
10 hours ago
- Asharq Al-Awsat
UK Foreign Secretary Visits Syria, Renewing Ties After 14 Years of Conflict
British Foreign Secretary David Lammy met in Damascus on Saturday with Syria's interim President Ahmed al-Sharaa, marking the restoration of relations after 14 years of tension during Syria's conflict and Assad family rule. Syria has been improving relations with Western countries following the fall of President Bashar al-Assad in December in an offensive led by al-Sharaa's Hayat Tahrir al-Sham group. Al-Sharaa's office said Lammy and the president discussed mutual relations and ways of boosting cooperation and the latest regional and international developments. Lammy later met his Syrian counterpart, Asaad al-Shaibani, state media reported. A statement issued by Britain's foreign office said the visit showed London's commitment to support Syria as the new government seeks to rebuild the country's economy, deliver an inclusive political transition and forge a path to justice for the victims of the Assad government. It added that there will be new UK funding to assist with the removal of Assad-era chemical weapons and provide urgent humanitarian assistance in Syria, to bolster UK and Middle East security and tackle irregular migration. The statement said the British government wants to ensure that the ISIS group's territorial defeat 'endures, and they can never resurge.' ISIS once controlled large parts of Syria and Iraq, where it planned attacks worldwide. It was defeated in Syria in March 2019 when the extremists lost the last sliver of land they once controlled. The statement said Britain's support for Syria is set to continue, with the additional 94.5 million pounds ($129 million) package announced Saturday. It will provide urgent humanitarian aid to Syrians, support Syria's longer-term recovery through education and livelihoods, and support countries hosting Syrian refugees in the region. This handout photo released by the Lebanese Presidency press office on July 5, 2025 shows Lebanon's President Joseph Aoun (R) receiving British Foreign Secretary David Lammy at the presidential palace in Baabda. (Lebanese Presidency / AFP) In April, the British government lifted sanctions against a dozen Syrian entities, including government departments and media outlets, to help the country rebuild after Assad's ouster. Weeks earlier, the UK had dropped sanctions against two dozen Syrian businesses, mostly banks and oil companies. Earlier this week, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order ending many American economic sanctions on Syria, following through on a promise he made to al-Sharaa. Syria's new leaders have been struggling to rebuild the country's decimated economy and infrastructure after nearly 14 years of civil war that has killed half a million people. In recent months, al-Sharaa visited oil-rich regional countries and France in May in his first visit to the Europe Union. Also on Saturday, Lammy met in Beirut with Lebanese President Joseph Aoun and they discussed the situation along the Lebanon-Israel border following the 14-month Israel-Hezbollah war. A statement issued by Aoun's office, quoted the Lebanese leader as telling Lammy that Beirut plans to raise the number of Lebanese troops along the border with Israel to 10,000. Aoun added that the only armed sides on the Lebanese side of the border will be Lebanon's national army and UN peacekeepers.
Arab News
21 hours ago
- Arab News
UK Labour's first year in power
This time last year Britain's Labour Party was celebrating one of the most memorable general election victories, a win that swept new Prime Minister Keir Starmer into 10 Downing Street with a decisive working majority of 172 seats. Admittedly, it was as much the unpopularity of the Conservative Party — after 14 years of austerity, division, and sheer incompetence — as it was the hope that Labour would usher in a new dawn for British politics and society that contributed to Labour's stunning success. Starmer and his government should have assumed power with a spring in their step, with confidence, and an inner belief befitting a party that had just received a mandate from the British people for a radical change of direction. Instead, the approach has been one of trepidation, risk aversion, and more focusing on the difficult legacy left by the previous government in order to justify a lack of any overarching vision or plan to achieve it. There is much truth in the claim that the Conservatives left the UK in a sorry state, but this does not exonerate the current government and its leader from a slow, stuttering, and uninspiring first year. A year on, it has become apparent that there are no quick fixes for the ills of Britain's economy and society, and that this is a government that is more comfortable with incremental change and continuity — when, in fact, there has been a need for some far-reaching changes to instill hope, a sense that a departure from the past is possible, and that 'we are all in it together.' There have been flickers of all that, but in a most disjointed manner, and Starmer has shown more leadership on the international stage than on the domestic one. Symbolically, on the week of its first anniversary, the government whips had to contain a rebellion by dozens of backbenchers and others in the party who opposed planned benefit cuts, and only some significant last-minute concessions saved it from losing a vote in the House of Commons. There are mitigating circumstances for the government's inability to set a reformist social-democratic agenda, among them an extremely costly Brexit; the Conservatives' neglect of public services, their general listless approach to social equality, opportunities for all and social justice in general; and even the necessity to divert resources to defense as a result of the immediate need to support Ukraine in its war with Russia. Nevertheless, a year into this government, British people do not see or feel that enough has improved on the issues that really matter to them, from reviving the National Health Service to progress on economic growth, education, infrastructure, and affordable housing. To be sure, we should cut Labour some slack. The public coffers were, indeed, rather empty when they came to power, and finding a balance between raising funds, mainly through taxation, while not sending the economy into stagnation is never easy. The UK economy is suffering from decades of structural vulnerabilities, and while there are pockets of economic buoyancy, at the same time there is also weak productivity, low business investment, persistent long-term unemployment, a constant decline in manufacturing, growing social inequalities, and a lack of competition in the utilities market. A year on, there is little evidence that these issues have been dealt with convincingly since Labour returned to power. Prime Minister Keir Starmer has shown more leadership on the international stage than on the domestic one. Yossi Mekelberg At the same time there is hardly any reason for doom and gloom, and unlike many previous administrations, Labour under Starmer is responsive when things go wrong. This may be down to either a genuine attentiveness to concerns raised by the public or dissenting voices within the party, or sheer pragmatism, but in any case the result is a government that is not averse to changing course, or at least to adjusting when it faces resistance. Frequent U-turns project both weakness and bad policy-making processes, and hence should not become habitual, especially if this compromises core principles or throws the government's agenda off course. Yet, there is something refreshing about it as a corrective mechanism. Previous administrations have adhered to policies even when it became obvious to everyone, even themselves, that this was damaging for the party and the country. One could argue that depriving millions of pensioners of winter fuel payments, not agreeing immediately to hold a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs, and most recently cutting benefits for some of those most in need was hardly what you would expect from a Labour government, but the British prime minister deserves some credit for reversing most of those decisions, even if not for political foresight or astuteness. Moreover, making mistakes early in the electoral cycle, especially with the safety net of a huge majority, enables not only a learning from mistakes, but also the opportunity for a mini-opposition to emerge within the ruling party to serve as the government's conscience and compass, as long as it is aimed at keeping the party in touch with its roots and support base. While Starmer is hardly seen as an inspirational leader at home, his record on the world stage is mixed. On Ukraine and on the need to rebuild the UK and European military capabilities to stop the Russian threat, he has been bold and determined to lead from the front. On the issue of a ceasefire in Gaza and recognizing Palestinian statehood, he has been too slow to recognize that giving Israel a blank cheque will only end in further disaster, and he always has one eye on what Washington says. He is still more respected abroad than at home. There is no escape from the fact that voters are already disillusioned with the Labour government, as they express it time and again in opinion polls. With the Conservatives incapable of picking themselves from the canvas after last year's election knockout, the big winner is the populist-nationalist party Reform, which in its opportunism is devoid of any constructive policies, only specializing in exploiting societal malaise, and people's resentments and fears. It is for Starmer to start his second year in power by diving deeper to address the fundamental sources of disquiet in British society and to resurrect the welfare society by enabling hard working people to have a decent life and for young people to see the prospect of enjoying the kind of life that the post-war generations enjoyed. This will require more than just tweaking with the current state of affairs.
