UK warns Sally Rooney after novelist pledges to fund Palestine Action
The prime minister's office said on Monday that 'support for a proscribed organisation is an offence under the Terrorism Act' and warned against backing such organisations.
'There is a difference between showing support for a proscribed organisation, which is an offence under the Terrorism Act, and legitimate protest in support of a cause,' a spokesperson was quoted by PA Media.
In an opinion piece in the Irish Times on Saturday, Rooney, the author of best-selling novels such as Normal People and Conversations with Friends, criticised the government's move to ban the pro-Palestinian group.
'Activists who disrupt the flow of weapons to a genocidal regime may violate petty criminal statutes, but they uphold a far greater law and a more profound human imperative: to protect a people and culture from annihilation,' she wrote in the article.
Palestine Action was banned after its activists broke into a military base in central England in June and sprayed red paint on two planes in protest against the UK's support for Israel's war on Gaza, which has killed more than 62,000 Palestinians, more than half of them women and children.
What's Palestine Action?
Since its founding in 2020, Palestine Action has disrupted the arms industry in the UK with 'direct action'. It says it is 'committed to ending global participation in Israel's genocidal and apartheid regime'.
Israel has been accused of widespread abuses in its 22 months of war on Gaza. The International Court of Justice in January 2024 said Israeli actions in Gaza were plausibly genocide. Since then, multiple rights organisations have called Israel's war a genocide. In November, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes.
Rooney said she chose the Dublin-based newspaper to publicise her intention rather than a UK one as doing so 'would now be illegal' in Britain after the government banned Palestine Action.
'The UK's state broadcaster … regularly pays me residual fees. I want to be clear that I intend to use these proceeds of my work, as well as my public platform generally, to go on supporting Palestine Action and direct action against genocide in whatever way I can,' she wrote.
Hundreds arrested
More than 700 supporters of Palestine Action have been arrested in the UK, mostly at demonstrations, since the group was outlawed under the Terrorism Act 2000.
'I feel obliged to state once more that like the hundreds of protesters arrested last weekend, I too support Palestine Action. If this makes me a 'supporter of terror' under UK law, so be it,' Rooney said.
The spokesperson from the prime minister's office said Palestine Action was proscribed 'based on security advice following serious attacks the group has committed, following an assessment made by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre'.
The government ban on Palestine Action came into force on July 5, days after it took responsibility for a break-in at an air force base in southern England that caused an estimated 7 million pounds ($9.3m) of damage to two aircraft.
The group said its activists were responding to Britain's indirect military support for Israel during the war in Gaza.
Being a member of Palestine Action or supporting the group is now a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. It places the campaign group on the same legal footing as ISIL (ISIS) and al-Qaeda.
More than 500 people were arrested at a protest in London's Parliament Square on August 9 for displaying placards backing the group. The number is thought to be the highest ever recorded number of detentions at a single protest in the capital.
At least 60 of them are due to face prosecution, police said.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has defended the proscription of the group, stating: 'UK national security and public safety must always be our top priority.'
'The assessments are very clear – this is not a nonviolent organisation,' she said.
In her article, Rooney accused the UK government of 'willingly stripping its own citizens of basic rights and freedoms, including the right to express and read dissenting opinions, in order to protect its relationship with Israel'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
4 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Security guarantees for Ukraine are 'not going to be sufficient'
Samuel Ramani talks about potential outcomes for Ukraine Quotable Samuel Ramani, an associate fellow at Royal United Services Institute talks about potential outcomes for Ukraine following the meeting between Trump, Zelenskyy and EU leaders. Video Duration 01 minutes 10 seconds 01:10 Video Duration 01 minutes 07 seconds 01:07 Video Duration 01 minutes 19 seconds 01:19 Video Duration 01 minutes 30 seconds 01:30 Video Duration 01 minutes 24 seconds 01:24 Video Duration 01 minutes 19 seconds 01:19 Video Duration 01 minutes 33 seconds 01:33
Al Jazeera
9 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
No US troops in Ukraine, Trump says
United States President Donald Trump has ruled out sending US troops to Ukraine to guarantee its security in the event of an agreement to end Russia's war in the country. Asked during an interview with Fox News on Tuesday what assurances he could provide that US troops would not be deployed to defend Ukraine's borders, Trump said: 'You have my assurance, and I am president. I am just trying to stop people from being killed.' Trump said that European countries were willing to provide troops to bolster Ukraine's security, but the US could provide support 'by air'. 'We're willing to help them with things, especially, probably if you talk about by air, because there's nobody that has the kind of stuff we have,' Trump told the Fox & Friends programme. 'I don't think it's going to be a problem.' White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later reiterated that US troops would not be part of any peace deal between Moscow and Kyiv, but that Washington would assist with 'coordination' and 'perhaps provide other means of security guarantees'. Trump's comments came a day after he hosted Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and top European leaders at the White House in his latest push to bring an end to the three-and-a-half-year-long conflict. While Zelenskyy and European leaders cast Monday's meeting as positive and productive, the question of how to ensure Ukraine's post-war security remains a major sticking point in the negotiations on ending the war. Although Trump has suggested that Russian President Vladimir Putin could agree to the deployment of Western troops in Ukraine to uphold a peace deal, Moscow has repeatedly dismissed the idea. Russia and Ukraine also appear to be far apart on the issue of territorial concessions and implementing a ceasefire in advance of a comprehensive peace deal. Trump on Tuesday also elaborated on his plans for a bilateral summit between Putin and Zelenskyy, telling conservative radio host Mark Levin that 'they're in the process of setting it up'. While Zelenskyy has said he is ready to meet Putin, Moscow has not confirmed that the Russian leader will attend a summit. On Tuesday, Switzerland's foreign affairs minister, Ignazio Cassis, told the national broadcaster that his country would be willing to host a Putin-Zelenskyy summit despite the International Criminal Court's outstanding arrest warrant for the Russian leader. After attending Monday's talks at the White House, French President Emmanuel Macron said he was pushing for Geneva to be the location for a summit between the two leaders.
Al Jazeera
a day ago
- Al Jazeera
UK agrees to drop mandate for Apple ‘back door', US spy chief says
Apple will no longer be forced to provide the United Kingdom's government with access to American citizens' encrypted data, Washington's spy chief has said, signalling the end of a months-long transatlantic privacy row. Tulsi Gabbard, the United States' director of national intelligence, said on Monday that London agreed to drop its requirement for Apple to provide a 'back door' that would have allowed access to the protected data of US users and 'encroached on our civil liberties'. Gabbard said the reversal was the result of months of engagement with the UK to 'ensure Americans' private data remains private and our constitutional rights and civil liberties are protected'. The UK government said it would not comment on operational matters, but that London and Washington have longstanding joint security and intelligence arrangements that include safeguards to protect privacy. 'We will continue to build on those arrangements, and we will also continue to maintain a strong security framework to ensure that we can continue to pursue terrorists and serious criminals operating in the UK,' a government spokesperson said. 'We will always take all actions necessary at the domestic level to keep UK citizens safe.' Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The UK's climbdown on encryption comes after Apple in February announced it could no longer offer advanced data protection, its highest-level security feature, in the country. While Apple did not provide a reason for the change at the time, the announcement came after The Washington Post reported that UK security officials had secretly ordered the California-based tech giant to provide blanket access to cloud data belonging to users around the world. Under the UK's Investigatory Powers Act, authorities may compel companies to remove encryption under what is known as a 'technical capability notice'. Firms that receive a notice are legally bound to secrecy about the order unless otherwise granted permission by the government. It was not immediately clear if Apple would start offering advanced data protection again in the UK. Like other tech giants, Apple has marketed its use of end-to-end encryption as proof of its steadfast commitment to the privacy of its users. End-to-end encryption scrambles data so it cannot be read by third parties, including law enforcement and tech companies themselves. Governments around the world have made numerous attempts to undermine or bypass encryption, saying that it shields serious criminals from scrutiny. Privacy experts and civil liberties advocates have condemned efforts to weaken the technology, arguing that they treat innocent people as potential criminals and put the privacy and security of all users at risk. John Pane, chair of the advocacy group Electronic Frontiers Australia, welcomed the UK's reported reversal as a win for digital rights and safety. 'Were Apple to create a backdoor to its encrypted user data it would create a significant risk which could be exploited by cybercriminals and authoritarian governments,' Pane told Al Jazeera. 'EFA believes access to encryption technologies is vital for individuals and groups to be able to safeguard the security and privacy of their information and it is also fundamental to the existence of the digital economy. The right to use encrypted communications must be enshrined in law.'
