High Court ruling on Palestine Action welcomed by UEA expert
By: Communications
A protest law expert at the University of East Anglia has welcomed a High Court decision that says the ban on Palestine Action under terrorism legislation is unlawful.
Prof David Mead from UEA Law School said it was in keeping with the balancing approach that human rights law requires of all government decisions.
"The High Court has decided that there should be a clear line between terrorist groups and groups that engage in disruptive criminality as part of a political campaign to persuade others or bring some commercial activity to an end,” said Prof Mead, Professor of UK Human Rights Law and an expert in the law of public order and protest, and on the policing of it.
“This decision is very welcome and in keeping with the balancing approach that human rights law requires of all government decisions – even, or perhaps especially, regarding groups that we fundamentally disagree with.
“Groups that engage in relatively sporadic and targeted actions that cause or have potential to cause limited harm and damage will always be subject to the ordinary criminal law.
“However, if the decision had gone the other way, allowing the Home Secretary additional powers to ban - with all the consequent very significant limitations on free speech and reduced criminal justice protections - would risk the proscription power being available in future not just to anti-arms protesters but say those who oppose fossil fuel extraction or abortions.”
Prof Mead added: “There was evidence before the court of journalists, academics and other campaigning groups feeling ‘chilled’ - exercising restraint and therefore deciding not to act or to speak when it would in fact have been perfectly lawful to do so.
“In addition, while the Court was persuaded that the serious criminal consequences of proscription - such as exposing people to arrest for showing support - would not have any widespread or general impact on expressions of support for the general Palestinian cause, the nature and scale of the group’s activities had not yet reached the level, scale and persistence that would justify the application of the criminal law measures that are the consequence of proscription, and the very significant interference with Convention rights resulting from those measures.
“Importantly the Home Secretary cannot take a decision that restricts the rights to free speech of the group, its supporters or critically others who perhaps might get caught up in the ban unless that decision is proportionate.”
Prof Mead has previously written about the banning of Palestine Action for The Conversation.
Related Articles
From UEA to bestseller list: Ruth Dugdall signs fresh six‑book crime deal
A University of East Anglia graduate has signed a new six-book deal with HQ Harper Collins for an award-winning crime series inspired by her studies in Norwich.
Read more
Norwich Business School enters top 30 in CEO Magazine’s Global MBA Rankings
UEA’s Norwich Business School has been recognised for the first time in CEO Magazine’s Global MBA Rankings, with its MBA offering overall recognised within the “Tier One” Global category and its Executive MBA programme being ranked 28th in the world.
Read more
Researchers warn against securitised response to global biodiversity loss
Scientists have warned that a new UK Government report on global biodiversity loss and national security risks distorting evidence and driving ineffective policy by framing ecological degradation and its impacts on migration as a security threat.
Read more