Lawyers representing Palestine Action’s co-founder have accused the Government of carrying out a “cynical media campaign” that is contradicted by evidence in a pending High Court battle.
Palestine Action’s co-founder Huda Ammori is taking legal action against the Home Office over the decision to ban the group, with the full legal challenge due to be heard in November.
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison.
Hundreds of arrests have been made since the ban came into force in July, with nearly 70 people charged.
Downing Street has defended the move to ban the organisation under counter-terror laws, saying evidence and security assessments shared in closed court supported its proscription.
The Government previously said “many people may not yet know the reality of this organisation” as the full details of the proscription process cannot be shared for national security reasons.
In a letter to the Government Legal Department earlier this month, Birnberg Peirce solicitors, who are representing Ms Ammori, said the Government and Labour MPs were making “misleading” public statements while presenting different arguments to the High Court.
The letter added: “This cynical media campaign reflects a fundamental lack of respect for court proceedings, and either indicates an attempt by your client to influence media coverage through assertions which she cannot evidence or is reflective of a serious breach of her duty of candour in these proceedings.”
It continued that the “proper place” for the Government to advance its case was in court, claiming its “approach in relation to briefing the media with a wholly different basis for proscription is entirely improper”.
Ms Ammori was given the green light to challenge Palestine Action’s proscription by a High Court judge last month.
In a ruling, Mr Justice Chamberlain said two arguments put forward on Ms Ammori’s behalf were “reasonably arguable” and would be heard at a three-day hearing in November.
The judge also ordered on Wednesday that human rights organisations Amnesty and Liberty could intervene in the case and file written submissions for the hearing as they had “relevant expertise”.
In its letter, Birnberg Peirce claimed the Government “now seeks to present Palestine Action as a danger to people” while the basis of the recommendation to ban the group was serious damage to property.
They also claimed there were “months of delay” in the ban against Palestine Action, with the recommendation being made in March 2025, but not implemented until June, after the group claimed responsibility for damage to jets at RAF Brize Norton.
The lawyers asked for disclosure of all briefings given to ministers, their staff and Ms Cooper since June 23.
The Home Office is not understood to have responded as of Friday.
It said it does not comment on ongoing legal proceedings but in a piece in the Observer on August 17 Ms Cooper said “anyone who wants to protest against the catastrophic humanitarian situation and crimes against humanity in Gaza, to oppose Israel’s military offensive” was free to do so.
She said: “The recent proscription of the group Palestine Action does not prevent those protests, and to claim otherwise is nonsense.
“That proscription concerns one specific organisation alone – a group that has conducted an escalating campaign involving not just sustained criminal damage, including to Britain’s national security infrastructure, but also intimidation, violence, weapons and serious injuries to individuals.
“The clear advice and intelligence given to me earlier this year from the UK’s world-leading counter-terrorism system, based on a robust assessment process, was that Palestine Action satisfies the relevant tests in the Terrorism Act 2000 and should be proscribed.”
