We Believe in Israel (WBII) has released a new parliamentary briefing titled Palestine Action – The Case for Proscription, setting out the legal, strategic, and civic rationale behind the UK Government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action under the Terrorism Act 2000.
The briefing, presented to policymakers, regulators, and civic leaders, draws a clear line between protected protest and organised sabotage. It emphasises that Britain’s democratic fabric depends on maintaining that distinction: vigorous dissent is protected, but deliberate attacks on critical infrastructure cannot be tolerated.
“This is not about a cause; it is about a method. The law is content-neutral. It does not weigh the politics of a banner; it weighs what is done in its name,”
— from the Foreword, WBII Parliamentary Briefing on Palestine Action.
Key Findings
-
Pattern of Sabotage: The report documents a sustained campaign of break-ins, plant contamination, and interference with defence infrastructure—culminating in attacks that grounded RAF aircraft.
-
Legal Threshold Met: Under Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000, ideologically motivated damage to property designed to influence government qualifies as terrorism. WBII’s analysis demonstrates that Palestine Action’s activities clearly meet this threshold.
-
Civic and Safety Implications: The escalation to safety-critical sabotage jeopardises public safety, undermines lawful protest, and risks contagion across other sectors such as energy, data, and transport.
-
Protest Protected, Coercion Proscribed: The report reiterates that proscription targets methods, not messages—preserving the right to advocate for Palestine while preventing coercive sabotage from eroding Britain’s civic space.
Why It Matters
Allowing sabotage to masquerade as speech, the briefing warns, would invite copycat actions across national infrastructure and provoke an arms race in “direct action.” Proscription restores the boundary between protest and coercion, protecting both public safety and civil liberty.
WBII calls upon Parliament, local authorities, universities, and community partners to uphold this distinction and ensure that Britain remains a nation where fierce disagreements are settled by words, votes, and law—not by those prepared to break things until they get their way.
We thank our partners for their support and help.
