1.1.4 – Rights in context
On Monday 15 June, the Court of Appeal overturned a ruling by the High Court which had questioned the legality of the Government’s decision to proscribe the campaign group Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act.
The decision to proscribe the group was taken by the previous Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, in July 2025. It has meant that membership of – or declaring support for – the group is a punishable offence that can lead to a custodial sentence. In February this year, the High Court ruled that the move had been unlawful as the ban was a disproportionate interference with the group’s right to protest and assemble, which are guaranteed under the Human Rights Act. One of the group’s founders has already indicated their intention to challenge last week’s ruling in the UK Supreme Court.
The judgment is a reminder of the challenge faced in any democracy by competing rights – the right of a minority to protest on the one hand and the right of wider society to feel safe and protected by the state on the other. The state must also seek to uphold these rights as far as possible, whilst also ensuring that it continues to protect national security.
In delivering the judgment of the court, Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr attempted to draw a clear distinction between the illegality of supporting Palestine Action, while seeking not to prevent legitimate campaigns in support of Palestine or in protest against the actions of Israel. However, she also noted that the ruling may have the inadvertent effect of deterring people from their legal right to protest, for fear of their actions being ‘construed as support for Palestine Action’, again highlighting the fine line that sometimes exists in relation to the right to protest in the UK.