Metropolitan Police Reverses Course on Palestine Action Arrests
The Metropolitan Police has announced a significant reversal in its enforcement approach, stating it will resume arresting people who show support for Palestine Action. This decision comes just weeks after the force said it would halt such arrests following a high court ruling that declared the ban on the direct action group unlawful. The scene outside the high court in London on 13 February captured the aftermath of this landmark judgment, highlighting the ongoing legal and political tensions.
Legal Context and Police Statement
In February, the high court ruled that the proscription of Palestine Action was unlawful, prompting the Met police to initially stop arrests under the Terrorism Act for supporting the group. However, on Wednesday, Deputy Assistant Commissioner James Harman clarified that this was an interim position. He explained that while the high court found the ban unlawful, the judgment's impact is suspended until the government's appeal is heard, which could take many months. Harman emphasized, "That means it is still a criminal offence to support Palestine Action. We must enforce the law as it is at the time, not as it might be at a future date."
The home secretary, Shabana Mahmood, is appealing the high court's decision, with the appeal scheduled for 28 and 29 April at the court of appeal. Until then, the ban remains in place, and the Met police asserts it must continue to enforce the law consistently. Harman noted that the force was forced to take an immediate view after the ruling due to protests outside the court, where displays of support for Palestine Action occurred, and uncertainty over the appeal process.
Protests and Legal Challenges
Defend Our Juries (DOJ), which organized protests leading to over 2,500 arrests for alleged support of Palestine Action, wrote to Met commissioner Sir Mark Rowley last week after a woman was arrested in London on 15 March for holding a sign stating, "I still oppose genocide. I still support Palestine Action." DOJ had planned a mass vigil on 11 April, underscoring the ongoing activism around this issue.
In a related development, Palestine Action-affiliated protesters who went on hunger strike while in prison awaiting trial are consulting lawyers about potential legal action against prison authorities for alleged medical negligence. At a press conference in London, Heba Muraisi, who endured a 73-day hunger strike—the longest among the protesters—claimed she was not given electrolytes and only received vitamins after 30 days. Qesser Zuhrah, on hunger strike for 48 days, said electrolytes were withheld until day 20 and withdrawn after she collapsed on day 42.
Kamran Ahmed, who fasted for 66 days, reported ongoing chest pains and shortness of breath, while others described neurological issues. Ahman stated, "The main takeaway is that all of us are suffering with trauma from the hunger strike. Everyone who went through the hunger strike was dehumanised, there was medical negligence that took place."
Government Response and Broader Implications
A government spokesperson responded to the allegations, asserting that all individuals were managed in line with longstanding prison policy. This included regular medical checks, heart monitoring, blood tests, and support to resume eating and drinking. The spokesperson added that prisoners were taken to hospital if deemed appropriate by healthcare teams.
This reversal by the Met police highlights the complex interplay between legal rulings, enforcement policies, and civil liberties in the UK. As the appeal process unfolds, the situation remains fluid, with potential implications for protest rights and terrorism legislation. The ongoing legal battles and public demonstrations suggest this issue will continue to attract significant attention and debate in the coming months.
