Palestine Action protesters arrested in Cardiff released on bail
BREAKING IN CARDIFF (Caerdydd) – Police are moving in on a group of 13 people who are sat outside the BBC Cymru HQ.
The group are holding signs with 'I OPPOSE GENOCIDE – I SUPPORT PALESTINE ACTION' written on them.
46 arrests have already taken place in London for the same act. pic.twitter.com/UVhCtFd2CL
— Defend our Juries (@DefendourJuries) July 12, 2025
Protesters sat outside the BBC Cymru HQ and held signs that read 'I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action', according to campaign group Defend Our Juries, who organised the demonstration.
In a statement on Sunday, the force confirmed that the individuals had been bailed but that an investigation into the incident, led by Counter Terrorism Policing Wales, was ongoing.
They were detained for an initial 24-hour period in custody before a further maximum of 12 hours extension was granted on Sunday, SWP said.
The terror group designation means that membership of, or support for, Palestine Action is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
The move to ban the organisation came after two Voyager aircraft were damaged at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire on June 20, an incident claimed by Palestine Action, which police said caused about £7 million worth of damage.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action three days later, saying that the vandalism of the planes was 'disgraceful' and the group had a 'long history of unacceptable criminal damage'.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Retired police officers to be forced to give evidence to new ‘Battle of Orgreave' inquiry
Retired police officers are to be forced to give evidence at a public inquiry into the alleged 'framing' of miners at the ' Battle of Orgreave ' in 1984. Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, has announced that a public inquiry will be launched this year to investigate the events surrounding the clashes between police and miners during the pit strike at the Orgreave Coking Plant in South Yorkshire on June 18 1984. Some 95 picketers were arrested and initially charged with riot and violent disorder, but the case against them collapsed in court amid allegations that South Yorkshire Police had falsified evidence. Gareth Peirce, who acted as solicitor for some of the picketers, said the charge of riot had been used 'to make a public example of people, as a device to assist in breaking the strike'. Human rights barrister Michael Mansfield called it 'the worst example of a mass frame-up in this country this century'. The inquiry was a manifesto commitment by Labour and will be statutory with powers to compel people to provide information where necessary, the Home Office said. Anyone who refuses to give evidence could face fines of up to £1,000 and/or six months in jail. The Bishop of Sheffield, the Rt Rev Dr Pete Wilcox, has agreed to chair the inquiry, which the Home Office said was intended to 'aid the public's understanding of how the events on the day, and immediately after, came to pass'. Ms Cooper said what happened at Orgreave 'cast a shadow over communities in Yorkshire and other mining areas'. 'The violent scenes and subsequent prosecutions raised concerns that have been left unanswered for decades, and we must now establish what happened,' the Home Secretary said. 'I pay tribute to the campaigners who never stopped in their search for truth and justice, and I look forward to continuing to work with them as we build an inquiry that gets the answers they and their communities deserve.' The closest parallel is the public inquiry into the Hillsborough football tragedy, after which two senior South Yorkshire police officers and the force's lawyer were prosecuted for perverting the course of justice but acquitted after court ruled it was not a statutory inquiry. Bishop Wilcox said he was working with the Home Office to agree a terms of reference. 'I expect the panel to begin its work in the autumn, and we will endeavour to deliver an inquiry which is thorough and fair, and which will uncover what happened at Orgreave as swiftly as possible,' he said. The Orgreave Truth and Justice Campaign (OTJC) said it wanted to know who was responsible for 'organising and ordering the deployment of multiple police forces, including mounted police armed with truncheons, shields and dogs, against striking miners'. The campaign group said it wanted the inquiry to find out how it was decided that 'striking miners should be attacked and arrested at Orgreave and charged with riot and unlawful assembly, which carried heavy prison sentences'. It added that it wanted to know why 'the police operational order for police deployments that day disappeared and other evidence been destroyed or embargoed until 2066 and 2071''. Kate Flannery, the OTJC secretary, said the announcement of an inquiry was 'really positive news'. Ms Flannery added: 'We now need to be satisfied that the inquiry is given the necessary powers to fully investigate all the aspects of the orchestrated policing at Orgreave, and have unrestricted access to all relevant information including government, police and media documents, photos and films.' Chris Kitchen, the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) general secretary, said the inquiry was 'hugely welcome'. Mr Kitchen added: 'The events at Orgreave, and throughout the strike, destroyed the trust between the police and mining communities even now, 41 years later. 'It is vital that this trust is won back and the NUM believe this inquiry will go some way to rebuilding that trust.' Kevin Horne, a miner arrested at Orgreave, said: 'It is now over 41 years since a paramilitary style police operation was planned at Orgreave and it is important to remember that some of the miners attacked and arrested there are now dead and many others are old and ill. 'We need a quick and thorough inquiry with a tight timescale so that surviving miners can at last obtain the truth and justice they have been waiting for.' Oliver Coppard, mayor of South Yorkshire, also welcomed the news of the inquiry, saying it was a 'landmark moment for justice and accountability'. Mr Coppard added: 'The Inquiry represents an opportunity to examine not only the actions of South Yorkshire Police and other forces on that day, but also the broader role of government at the time. 'It's a step towards setting the historical record straight, ensuring lessons are learned, and restoring public trust.'
South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
High Court to hear bid to challenge Palestine Action ban
Huda Ammori is seeking to challenge Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge to that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Government is opposing the bid for the legal challenge to be allowed to proceed, with the hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain due to begin at 10.30am on Monday at the Royal Courts of Justice. Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident, and are due to face trial in early 2027. Since the ban came into force, dozens of people have been arrested at protests in cities including London, Manchester and Cardiff, including an 83-year-old reverend. At the hearing earlier this month, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, said the proscription was an 'ill-considered, discriminatory and authoritarian abuse of statutory power'. He also said that the Home Office 'has still not sufficiently articulated or evidenced a national security reason that proscription should be brought into effect now'. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that the harm caused by the ban would be 'far-reaching' and could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Dismissing the bid for a temporary block, the judge said that the 'harm which would ensue' if a block was not ordered was 'insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force'. He added that some of the 'consequences feared by the claimant' were 'overstated'. At a late-night Court of Appeal hearing, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis threw out a bid to challenge the High Court's decision, finding that there was 'no real prospect of a successful appeal'.
Rhyl Journal
3 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
High Court to hear bid to challenge Palestine Action ban
Huda Ammori is seeking to challenge Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe Palestine Action under anti-terror laws, after the group claimed an action which saw two Voyager planes damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. On July 4, Ms Ammori failed in a High Court bid to temporarily block the ban coming into effect, with the Court of Appeal dismissing a challenge to that decision less than two hours before the proscription came into force on July 5. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, under the Terrorism Act 2000. The Government is opposing the bid for the legal challenge to be allowed to proceed, with the hearing before Mr Justice Chamberlain due to begin at 10.30am on Monday at the Royal Courts of Justice. Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, stating that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'. Four people – Amy Gardiner-Gibson, 29, Jony Cink, 24, Daniel Jeronymides-Norie, 36, and Lewis Chiaramello, 22 – have all been charged in connection with the incident, and are due to face trial in early 2027. Since the ban came into force, dozens of people have been arrested at protests in cities including London, Manchester and Cardiff, including an 83-year-old reverend. At the hearing earlier this month, Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, said the proscription was an 'ill-considered, discriminatory and authoritarian abuse of statutory power'. He also said that the Home Office 'has still not sufficiently articulated or evidenced a national security reason that proscription should be brought into effect now'. Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC, also representing Ms Ammori, told the court that the harm caused by the ban would be 'far-reaching' and could cause 'irreparable harm to large numbers of members of the public', including causing some to 'self-censor'. Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Mr Justice Chamberlain said that an assessment on whether to ban the group had been made as early as March, and 'preceded' the incident at RAF Brize Norton. Dismissing the bid for a temporary block, the judge said that the 'harm which would ensue' if a block was not ordered was 'insufficient to outweigh the strong public interest in maintaining the order in force'. He added that some of the 'consequences feared by the claimant' were 'overstated'. At a late-night Court of Appeal hearing, the Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Lord Justice Lewis and Lord Justice Edis threw out a bid to challenge the High Court's decision, finding that there was 'no real prospect of a successful appeal'.
