Kneecap's legal team for court battle to include Julian Assange lawyer
Rapper O hAnnaidh, who performs under the name Mo Chara, will be represented by a team that includes Gareth Peirce, solicitor for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during his fight against US extradition, and Rosalind Comyn, who has represented Extinction Rebellion protesters in court.
The 27-year-old was charged by postal requisition over the alleged display of a Hezbollah flag at a gig at the O2 Forum in Kentish Town, north London, in November last year.
His legal team also includes Darragh Mackin from Phoenix Law, Brenda Campbell KC, Jude Bunting KC and Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC.
Mr Mackin was the solicitor for Sarah Ewart, whose successful legal challenge helped to usher in the decriminalisation of abortion in Northern Ireland, while Ms Campbell was the defence barrister in the collapsed case against Seamus Daly, who was accused of murdering people in the IRA bomb attack of 1998 in Omagh.
Mr Bunting acted for non-profit company Liberty in the Stansted 15's successful conviction appeal after they broke into Stansted Airport to stop a plane deporting people to Africa, which was a case Ms Ni Ghralaigh also worked on.
In an Instagram post the group said: 'The British establishment is conducting a campaign against Kneecap which is to be fought in Westminster Magistrates Court… We are ready for this fight. We are proud to have such a strong legal team with us.'
Mr Mackin told the PA news agency: 'It is difficult to comprehend a case of greater international importance in recent years.
'Kneecap has played an unrivalled role in standing up for those without a voice in Gaza. They speak truth to power when others shy away.
'It is a great privilege to be instructed alongside my colleagues to defend the important principle of freedom of expression, in the pending battle before the London Court.'
In May, the Metropolitan Police said Kneecap were being investigated by counter-terrorism police after videos emerged allegedly showing the band calling for the deaths of MPs and shouting 'up Hamas, up Hezbollah'.
Members of Kneecap, Liam Og O Hannaigh (Mo Chara), JJ O'Dochartaigh (DJ Provai) and Naoise O Caireallain (Moglai Bap) attending the Irish Film and Television Academy (IFTA) Awards Ceremony (Brian Lawless/PA)
They apologised to the families of murdered MPs but said footage of the incident had been 'exploited and weaponised'.
They also said they have 'never supported' Hamas or Hezbollah, which are banned in the UK.
In 2024, the band released an eponymous film starring Oscar-nominated actor Michael Fassbender which is a fictionalised retelling of how the band came together and follows the Belfast group on their mission to save their mother tongue through music.
Formed in 2017, the group, made up of O hAnnaidh, Naoise O Caireallain and JJ O Dochartaigh, are known for their provocative lyrics and merchandise as well as their championing of the Irish language.
Their best-known tracks include Get Your Brits Out, Better Way To Live, featuring Grian Chatten from Fontaines DC, and 3Cag.
O hAnnaidh is due to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on June 18.
His lawyers have been approached for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
25 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
MARK ALMOND: Benjamin Netanyahu can smell the air - and Tehran reeks of weakness
Dazzling as Israel 's initial 48 hours of bombing Iran 's nuclear installations, military leadership and key scientists have been, victory in this war requires much more than precision strikes. Iran is a huge country and might absorb a lot of such punishment before cracking. Unlike America's 'shock and awe' attack on Saddam Hussein's Iraq in 2003, the Israelis are not intending to use their amazing aerial superiority to invade Iran. It is because Tehran's terrorist ally Hezbollah has been defanged – following Israel's invasion of the group's stronghold in southern Lebanon last year and its audacious detonation of pagers used by Hezbollah fighters – that Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has felt emboldened to strike Iran now. Nonetheless, Israel's army is bogged down fighting Iran's other insurgent ally, Hamas, in Gaza and needs to control millions of Arabs in the occupied West Bank, so it is not looking for another front further to the east. But on Friday night, Netanyahu indicated that this campaign was about more than just disabling Iran's nuclear weapons capability. He directly called on ordinary Iranians to 'rise up' and overthrow the 'evil and oppressive regime' in Tehran. Fomenting a revolution from 50,000 feet is a tall order but Netanyahu can smell the air – and Iran reeks of weakness. At 86, its Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, hasn't many years left, and his response to this attack has been inept and scattergun, with the vast majority of his drones and missiles destroyed by Israeli defences. Operational incompetence aside, for years billions have been squandered on terrorist proxies abroad like Hamas and Hezbollah and weapons systems that don't work well enough to deter Israeli missiles. Meanwhile economic sanctions eat away at living standards of ordinary Iranians. For this reason, they have chafed at their rulers' priorities, taking to the streets in several uprisings since 2009. Yet the regime's thugs have suppressed them viciously – until now. Insurrection in Iranian cities could well pressure the Brutuses within the regime to act. But Israel must be careful what it wishes for. If the regime implodes, Khamenei – a leader who specialises in making bad military decisions – could be replaced by someone infinitely more able. The Ayatollah has spent decades marginalising slightly less hardline, but rather more competent, rivals. Veterans such as Mir Hossein Mousavi, the prime minister who steered Iran through the war with Iraq in the 1980s, but lost office when Khamenei came to power in 1989. In leading the protest movement in 2009, Mousavi's anti-Khamenei credentials are sound and he could be a plausible 'moderate', but he is an old man himself at 83 and an advocate of an Iranian atomic bomb. Having kneecapped the country's nuclear programme, could the West and Israel live with that? Under Donald Trump, pragmatism reigns. Since Syria's pro-Iranian dictator, Bashar Al Assad, was toppled last December, Washington has cosied up to the country's new ruler, Ahmed Al Sharaa, on whom it had placed a $10 million bounty as an Al Qaeda terrorist. So the Trump Administration could deal with a new Iranian regime made up of old enemies provided they reverse course. An ex-Islamic Republic insider, cynical enough to pull the plug on the incompetent fanatics running Iran, could be the best way out for Israel and the West. A bloodless coup at the top is one thing, but chaos throughout the country could endanger the safe-keeping of its nuclear technology and chemical weapons, so some kind of orderly transition is vital. It won't be ideal. Certainly not for those Iranians who have borne the brunt of the Ayatollah's cruelties and hardships. But it might well be the fastest way to end this war and offer some hope of a better future.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Netanyahu's race against the clock to go ‘full Hezbollah' on Iran
'I must govern the clock, not be governed by it.' So said Golda Meir, one of Israel's founders and its first and only female prime minister. Now, some 50 years later, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) may have realised her insight. Indeed, they have taken the clock and blown it to smithereens, neutralising its power to contain them once and for all. For the mullahs of Iran, this could spell curtains, or at least a long and painful 'Hezbollah-isation' stretching over weeks and months. The clock has always been central to Israeli military planning, with its strategists at the Kirya in central Tel Aviv long regarding it as important as guns and manpower. There are two big drivers. First, the IDF is reliant on reservists, so once a war starts there is an immediate social and economic imperative to move quickly. But much more influential – since the Yom Kippur war of 1973 and the global oil crisis it sparked – has been the 'diplomatic clock' and Israel's reliance on the US and its allies for military and diplomatic support. Once any new conflict started, the clock of international opinion would start ticking, with the US generally moving to bring things to a close as soon as possible. The prospect of the Middle East going up in flames and oil prices spiking ruinously has always trumped Israel's longer term security interests. Even after the Oct 7 massacre, Israel's military establishment feared it had only a limited window to deal with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in the north. Manuel Trajtenberg, then executive director of the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, told The Telegraph at the time that the IDF was racing against 'several different clocks, all of them ticking down'. 'There's the military clock itself in terms of manpower and capacity but also the hostages, international pressure and even economic pressures,' he said. Looking back now, it's hard to determine what the worry was. While the 1967 Arab-Israeli War was famously wrapped up in six days, the latest conflict has been raging for nearly two years. Hamas has all but been blasted to extinction, ditto Hezbollah in Lebanon. The IDF is acting at will against anything it judges a threat in Syria and moves with impunity over Yemen. Now Iran – 'the head of the octopus' – is firmly in its sights. Part of what's changed things is the psychological shock of Oct 7 and the sense of existential crisis in Israel it has created. 'The diplomatic clock is a fraud, and Israel's leaders must see through it', urged Nave Dromi, director of the Israel Victory Project in the wake of the massacre. 'There can be no specific time limitations on responding to the murder, rape and butchery of 1,200 people, the wounding of thousands of others and the vicious kidnapping and humiliation of 240 Israelis and foreigners'. But as important in the destruction of the clock is Benjamin Netanyahu and his willingness to take on US presidents – a theme since he confronted Barack Obama over his 2015 nuclear deal with Iran from the floor of the US Congress. The Israeli prime minister then tied Joe Biden in knots over Gaza, and then Lebanon, for the final 15 months of his term. And he has now almost certainly cocked a snook at Donald Trump, who, by most accounts, wanted more time to renegotiate a nuclear deal with Tehran. 'Trump had sought additional time from Netanyahu for nuclear talks, and Netanyahu did not give it to him,' said Daniel Shapiro who served as US ambassador to Israel from 2011 to 2017, in an interview with Foreign Affairs magazine on Friday. For Iran, Netanyahu's great foe of more than 30 years, this could be very bad news indeed, with nothing obvious to stop Israel's bombing campaign against it grinding on for weeks and months. Sima Shine, a senior researcher at INSS, said there was 'no significant international pressure' to wrap things up – quite a thing for a former Mossad official and Iran specialist who spent decades battling the clock. 'There is little sympathy for the Iranian regime', she said. 'Everyone recognises its negative role in the war in Ukraine, its involvement in the Middle East conflicts, its brutal suppression of protesters – especially women – and the fact that no one wants to see it possess nuclear weapons.' At a briefing for journalists on Saturday, a senior IDF official turned things around 180 degrees, conjuring up a very different figurative clock. 'We are prepared for more … an aerial road to Tehran has effectively been opened', he said. 'Our goal in these operations is to remove an existential threat; to remove a ticking time bomb.'
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
With no sign of an end to fighting, what moves will Israel and Iran make next?
It is the war that has been feared for the best part of five decades. Now it is here, there's nothing in the language emanating for Tehran or Tel Aviv to suggest any hope of it ending quickly, despite the potentially parlous consequences for both sides, the region and beyond. World leaders, near and far, are calling for restraint but their words are being lost in the rush to rearm and attack once more. Israel warns 'Tehran will burn' while those in Tehran warn they will 'open the doors of hell' - both could be absolutely right and both share the same goal, victory and survival. After Gaza and Lebanon, Israel is emboldened. For the same reasons Iran is enfeebled, no longer able to rely on the strength, real or perceived, of Hamas or Hezbollah and aware the Israel has penetrated deep into its society and security. Israel also knows it has, should the going become excessively tough, the support, weaponry and military might of the United States to fall back on. Keir Starmer has also said RAF aircraft, including Typhoon fighter jets, have been sent to the Middle East region for 'contingency support', although the prime minister refused to say under what circumstances jets would be scrambled. Iran has less surety as to the support it might receive from Russia, China and others who have offered support or supply of weaponry. However it is still very much in the fight and could remain there. So where could this go now? The attacks by both on the other's territory can and will continue. Iran could block the Strait of Hormuz, where a quarter of global oil passes through. The impact of that would be felt globally quickly. It could also expand or shift its focus to American military assets in the region. Proxy support would help that effort, though going for the bases would likely bring the US directly into the war, it might be a gamble Iran is willing to take. There is also the question, at the heart of this whole war, as to how close to a nuclear weapon Iran is and whether even under attack they can speed one through and provide themselves with the very best defence. Israel too has its nuclear option - literally and metaphorically. Literally it is a nuclear power, metaphorically it could chose to take its fight right to the top Iran's power structure and attempt to take out the Ayatollah. That one move could lead to end of the Iranian regime. Those with everything to lose or nothing left to lose are dangerous adversaries. For sure brutal days lie ahead.
