logo
Justice minister ‘terrified' by actions of pro-Palestinian activists, court told

Justice minister ‘terrified' by actions of pro-Palestinian activists, court told

A Government minister has told a court she was 'terrified' after being confronted by two pro-Palestinian activists while campaigning in the lead-up to the general election.
Alex Davies-Jones, the Labour MP for Pontypridd, gave evidence at Cardiff Magistrates' Court on Monday in the trial of Ayeshah Behit, 31, and Hiba Ahmed, 26, who deny harassment.
The court heard how Ms Davies-Jones, a justice minister, had arrived in the village of Treforest, Rhondda Cynon Taf, on the afternoon of June 26 last year.
As she made her way to the campaign meeting place, she saw Behit and Ahmed with leaflets describing her as a 'full-blown supporter of this genocide' – referring to the Israel-Hamas conflict.
Ms Davies-Jones told the court: 'I was asked a number of questions around the conflict in Israel and Palestine, and my conduct as an MP, if I had taken part in votes, membership of organisations such as Labour Friends of Israel.
'They asked me about the ceasefire and why I had abstained. I clarified I hadn't abstained, I wasn't in the country, I was paired in that vote.
'It was escalating in terms of passion and intensity. We walked off in the opposite direction. We felt scared and intimidated, and we wanted to leave the situation.
'I had a number of young members with me. They already felt uncomfortable, I didn't want them to feel more at risk.
'They began to follow us. They were shouting and bellowing down the street at us – 'why do you support genocide, why are you murdering babies, Alex Davies-Jones, do you support genocide?''
Ms Davies-Jones said her group walked into the University of South Wales campus, then continued their campaigning but saw Behit and Ahmed about 20 minutes later.
She described how Labour volunteers were knocking on doors and talking to constituents, followed by the two defendants handing out leaflets and claiming she 'supported genocide and murdering babies'.
The team decided to finish early but discovered one of their vehicles had been 'covered with stickers and leaflets', Ms Davies-Jones said.
Later that day, Behit and Ahmed put posters on the Labour office – the base of Ms Davies-Jones' campaign for the general election – in Pontypridd that referred to politicians 'enabling genocide'.
They also placed stickers in black capital letters reading 'Alex Davies-Jones how many murdered children is too many?' on the office, and a poster reading 'Alex Davies-Jones supports genocide' on a bus stop.
When asked about how their actions made her feel, Ms Davies-Jones told the court: 'I was terrified.
'I was worried because of the risk to my team and supporters, and my reputation given it was the general election and what that would mean.
'I was scared about what things they were going to do and what they were doing.'
A video of the confrontation was then uploaded onto social media, with the caption describing Ms Davies-Jones as racist.
She added: 'The abuse was endless. It was awful. It was relentless. I felt under attack. The video was clipped and manipulated in a way that made it seem I had lied.'
Ms Davies-Jones said that as a result of the incident, she reduced campaigning sessions and had to be accompanied by close protection officers.
The politician, who was first elected as MP for Pontypridd in 2019, described the murders of fellow MPs Jo Cox and Sir David Amess as 'devastating'.
'They have an impact on all of us,' Ms Davies-Jones said.
'They have changed our lives fundamentally in how we live and work.'
Giving evidence, Ahmed said she and Behit lived in Treforest and had wanted to raise awareness of Ms Davies-Jones' actions on Palestine ahead of the election.
She said the defendants, both of Treforest, had planned to hand out and post leaflets that afternoon when they saw their MP coming towards them.
Ahmed said: 'I was genuinely really surprised when I saw her. I've lived in Treforest for a couple of years, I've never seen her.
'It was like seeing a celebrity almost, like a unicorn in the wild.
'I took the video because I thought nobody would believe me. It was a surprise when she approached us and said hi and she was willing to have a conversation.
'It felt like a really normal conversation between people who don't agree on something.
'Have you ever seen MPs talk to each other in the House of Commons? They can be quite brutal to each other.'
Ahmed said it was her first time leafleting, having previously emailed Ms Davies-Jones and taken part in peaceful protest.
'This wasn't really about her, it was about Palestine,' she said.
Behit told the court: 'She was running for MP and where I lived there were posters everywhere. It was constant, everywhere you looked was pro-Alex.
'My intention was to show a different perspective, to get people to do their own research. It was never about Alex as a person.
'Part of her job as an MP is having people look at her policies, her opinions and how she voted.'
Both defendants deny that their actions amounted to harassment.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Readers' Letters: SNP would leave Scots defenceless in face of aggressive Russia
Readers' Letters: SNP would leave Scots defenceless in face of aggressive Russia

Scotsman

time37 minutes ago

  • Scotsman

Readers' Letters: SNP would leave Scots defenceless in face of aggressive Russia

Government policies have shot down chance of a lucrative welding plant being sighted in Scotland, says reader Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Scottish Enterprise has decided to withdraw a £2.5 million grant for a welding centre to support the UK's submarine fleet. This initiative, led by Rolls Royce no less, would have injected £11m into the Scottish economy. The funding was pulled thanks to SNP policy. The SNP opposes the defence of the UK on the pathetic grounds that they dislike nuclear weapons. Well, so do I, especially the ones pointed at us by Russia. As the Ukrainians have pointed out, there would be no Russian forces in their country if they had not unilaterally given up their nuclear stockpile (with Russian guarantees) in the Nineties. The jobs will probably end up in England. Well done, SNP. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad If anyone in the Glasgow area who cares about our independence and democracy wishes to stay free and democratic, they cannot possibly vote for a party like the SNP who would leave us defenceless in the face of an aggressive, imperialist power like Russia. First Minister John Swinney's SNP government has blocked a £2.5 million grant for a specialist welding centre in Glasgow Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh Who's posturing? On 2 July The Scotsman's leader column commented on the SNP government's refusal to support munitions production in Scotland by stating that 'National security must take precedence over politically driven moral posturing'. This sounded like a familiar phrase until I realised this was almost exactly Benjamin Netanyahu's justification for creating starvation conditions in Gaza. It was also Keir Starmer's excuse for not backing an SNP motion for a ceasefire in Gaza during a Westminster debate last year. Yet 12 months on we have the same Mr Starmer threatening trade sanctions in response to the unjustified bombing of Palestinian woman and children while simultaneously declining to stop selling munitions to Israel. Is that not politically driven moral posturing with bells on? The SNP won an election in Scotland based on adhering to a moral principle now being derided by the UK Defence Secretary John Healey as 'student union politics'. His party lost that election so it would appear that the people agreed with the students. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Finally, given that defence is reserved, can somebody explain why the Scottish Treasury is being asked to fund a defence initiative that was decided in Westminster without any reference to the Scottish Government? Robert Menzies, Falkirk MAD decision Across the length and breadth of the UK the NHS and other public services are in desperate need of additional funding. In England alone the predicted funding gap for local councils in 2025/26 is £3.4 billion, a figure expected to rise to £6.9bn by 2026/27 according to research by UNISON. In the third quarter of 2024/25 there were 106,000 workforce vacancies in NHS England with 27,000 nursing positions needing filled. One of the consequences of persistent understaffing has been widespread staff burnout. This has led to a mental health crisis amongst healthcare workers. Bearing all this in mind it is difficult to comprehend why Sir Keir Starmer is evidently determined to spend billions more on 'defence'. If the UK, US, Russia, China etc keep upping the ante by spending more and more on increasingly sophisticated weapons the only beneficiaries will be arms companies and their shareholders. The inevitable outcome of continued escalation of tensions will be nuclear war and mutually assured destruction! Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad It is surely time for our government to focus on welfare not warfare! Alan Woodcock, Dundee Bluff called Nigel Farage has certainly set the cat amongst the pigeons. His brief Scottish visit revealed his desire to run a close eye over government spending. He mentioned the Barnett formula which gives Scots a £1,500 or so 'Union dividend'. This is correct, but the SNP never mentions this positively. If this sum was reduced Scotland would be in deep trouble as our already higher taxes must rise or expenditure must be cut. Talk of our 'wonderful situation' as regards renewable energy and Scotland receiving far less in return for general taxation are dubious to say the least. The SNP has lived in Cloud Cuckoo Land for years over claims 'independence' would fix all. It has repeatedly gone for benefits increases without due consideration as to where the money will come from. The reality, is Holyrood needs Westminster more than Westminster needs Holyrood. Truly the SNP bluff has been called. Gerald Edwards, Glasgow Enough Farage Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Nigel Farage – that perpetually smirking peddler of English nationalism – has once again deigned to visit Scotland, though 'visit' is too charitable a word for what amounts to a fugitive's furtive dash between closed-door meetings and stage-managed photo ops. Here is a man who has built an entire career on brazen falsehoods that would make even Donald Trump blush, yet who now slinks northwards, dodging scrutiny like a man allergic to daylight. His latest wheeze? A proposal to slash £400 billion from public spending – a figure so recklessly draconian that it makes former Tory Chancellor George Osborne's austerity look like a Labour budget. But then, Farage has never been one to let arithmetic – or indeed, reality – interfere with a good populist con. Brexit, his crowning lie, has already left Britain poorer, weaker and more isolated. Yet here he is, undeterred, flogging the same snake oil under a fresh label. And what of his sudden devotion to 'America First' rhetoric? The man who once postured as the great defender of British sovereignty now fawns over the US far-right, as if his principles were anything more than a series of grubby alliances with whoever will give him airtime. One can only imagine his vision for Scotland: the NHS flogged off to the highest bidder, workers' rights gutted and the country picked clean by private equity vultures. No surprise, then, that support for Scottish independence now stands at 59 per cent – a damning verdict not just on the Union, but on the procession of chancers Westminster keeps inflicting upon it. The English nationalists have overplayed their hand, and Scotland, increasingly, has no patience left for their nonsense. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Farage thrives in the shadows, where his lies go unchecked and his bluster passes for conviction. But the act is wearing thin. The question is no longer whether he can be stopped, but how much more damage he'll be allowed to wreak before the country – and Scotland in particular – finally decides it's had enough of the charlatan. Alan Hinnrichs, Dundee Neutral? Yes please Lord Steel of Aikwood (Letters, 2 June) is correct in saying that 'the Presiding Officer of the Scottish Parliament is required to give up party membership and be neutral'. Would that that were so. Alison Johnstone has allowed flagrant breaches of acceptable behaviour by SNP ministers, but it is Conservative Douglas Ross who has been sanctioned for trying to get answers from them. Only a couple of weeks ago, Ms Johnstone was unmoved when John Swinney roared 'the Conservative Party is a disgusting organisation', without requesting that he moderate his language. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad More recently, Ash Regan asked a detailed, courteous and reasonable question of Shirley-Anne Somerville, the social security minister: 'Trans-identifying people deserve dignity and honesty, but women and girls deserve safety. So what support is there for those who faced coercion, risked harm under gender self-ID, whose wellbeing, whose livelihoods have suffered for defending the lawful human rights to sex-based protections for women and girls?' Ms Somerville gave a non-answer: 'We have consistently called for everyone that is engaging in this debate to be respectful and mindful of their tone during this debate...'. Not the slightest attempt to answer the question referring to those who have been vilified for defending women's privacy, dignity and safety, those who have been dismissed or disciplined for refusing to accept the false doctrine based on denial of biological sex. And no reproof from Ms Johnstone. I recall Ken Macintosh, a previous Presiding Officer, insisting repeatedly that Joe Fitzpatrick, SNP MSP, answer a question rather than deliver a prepared speech. There seems to be no chance of Ms Johnstone following that example. Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh Bank clearances Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Further to Katharine Hay's article on the 'new clearances' (2 June), I quote the words of the late Norman Vincent, who said in an interview with STV on the closure of the four Bank of Scotland branches in Sutherland, 'Well this is just like the second Highland Clearance.' The first removed people for sheep. The second is moving people for wind turbines, battery energy storage systems (BESS) and pylon lines. Michael Baird, Bonar Bridge, Highland Crowded house Re: your editorial, 'Tribute band to upstage Oasis? Murrayfield showdown looms' (3 June), it's bad enough being invaded three times in a week during the Festival, when the city is already bursting at its seams, by Oasis fans, without the prospect of several thousand more Oasis tribute band fans in the Ice Rink. Your editorial naively speaks of the crowds mixing in local bars after the shows. There are four local bars! This is a residential area, totally unable to cope with tens of thousands of fans pouring in over a five-day period. It's madness! Brian Bannatyne-Scott, Edinburgh Write to The Scotsman Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad

Chancellor to rip up treasury protocol to bolster connectivity between key cities in the Midlands
Chancellor to rip up treasury protocol to bolster connectivity between key cities in the Midlands

ITV News

time40 minutes ago

  • ITV News

Chancellor to rip up treasury protocol to bolster connectivity between key cities in the Midlands

Chancellor Rachel Reeves is expected to announce billions of pounds of investment in public transport - including £2.4 billion for the West Midlands to fund an extension of the region's metro. The money will be used to extend the network from Birmingham city centre to the new sports quarter in the east side of the city. The East Midlands will also receive £2 billion to design a new mass transit system between Derby and Nottingham. It is part of a £15.6-billion package for mayoral authorities. She argues that Britain 'cannot rely on a handful of places forging ahead of the rest of the country'. She is also expected to confirm that next week's spending review will include changes to rules in the Treasury's Green Book that determine whether projects receive funding. Green Book rules have been criticised in some quarters for favouring investment in London and the South East. Ms Reeves is expected to argue that changing the rules will ensure the Government 'gives every region a fair hearing when it comes to investments'. Elsewhere West Yorkshire will be given £2.1 billion to start building its Mass Transit by 2028. Greater Manchester will also receive £2.5 billion for projects including new tram stops in Bury, Manchester and Oldham and an extension of the tram network to Stockport. A £1.5 billion investment in South Yorkshire will include £530 million to renew the region's trams. In the south, the West of England will receive £800 million, including £200 million to develop mass transit links between Bristol, Bath, South Gloucestershire and north Somerset. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said the announcement 'marks a watershed moment on our journey to improving transport across the North and Midlands – opening up access to jobs, growing the economy and driving up quality of life'. Some projects being backed on Wednesday, such as the development of a mass transit network in West Yorkshire, formed part of Rishi Sunak's 'Network North' plan intended to compensate for the decision to scrap the HS2 line north of Birmingham. Wednesday's announcement is the first from the spending review due on June 11 that will set out the Government's day-to-day departmental budgets for the next three years and investment budgets for the next four. The review is expected to be a difficult one for the Government, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the Chancellor faces 'unavoidably tough decisions' as the demands of NHS and defence spending raise the prospect of cuts in other departments. After coming to power in July, Labour launched a review of those projects, arguing they had not been fully funded. Wednesday's announcement is the first from the spending review due on June 11 that will set out the Government's day-to-day departmental budgets for the next three years and investment budgets for the next four. The review is expected to be a difficult one for the Government, with the Institute for Fiscal Studies saying the Chancellor faces 'unavoidably tough decisions' as the demands of NHS and defence spending raise the prospect of cuts in other departments.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store