PALESTINE Action will be able to challenge the UK Government’s ban on the organisation under terror laws.
The group’s co-founder Huda Ammori won a legal battle to gain permission to attempt to overturn Labour's proscription of her organisation.
A separate bid to pause the ban was rejected by the High Court.
In a decision on Wednesday, judge Justice Chamberlain said that two parts of the arguments on Ammori’s behalf were “reasonably arguable”: her claims that the ban is a "disproportionate interference" with her rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and that the Home Secretary's failure to consult the group was “in breach of natural justice”.
Other arguments put forward, including that the group's actions could be considered "morally or politically justifiable", were ruled out of bounds.
Ammori said: “This landmark decision to grant a judicial review which could see the Home Secretary’s unlawful decision to ban Palestine Action quashed, demonstrates the significance of this case for freedoms of speech, expression and assembly and rights to natural justice in our country and the rule of law itself.”
Home Secretary Yvette Cooper banned Palestine Action after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton and damaged military planes with red spray paint on June 20.
Under the current rules, it is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison to belong to or express support for the group, even without intending to.
Wearing a Palestine Action T-shirt or displaying their logo from one's home could result in a six month prison sentence and a fine of up to £5000.
The ban, an unprecedented step against a direct action group, has been widely criticised for what opponents describe as its chilling effect on freedom of expression.
More than 100 people across the UK have been arrested for appearing to express support for the organisation since the ban came into force.
Volker Turk (above), the UN's high commissioner for human rights, said it was a "disturbing” misuse of UK counterterrorism legislation.
Earlier this month, lawyers for Ammori asked a judge to allow her to bring a High Court challenge over the ban, describing it as an “unlawful interference” with freedom of expression.
Raza Husain KC, for Ammori, told the court at the hearing on July 21 that the ban had made the UK “an international outlier” and was “repugnant”.
Husain added: “The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.”
The Home Office argued that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was “squarely” within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription.
Government lawyer James Eadie KC (below) said in written submissions: "There is no credible basis on which it can be asserted that the purpose of this activity is not designed to influence the Government, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.”
Areeba Hamid, co-executive director of Greenpeace, said: "We support this decision and hope the judicial review will reveal this proscription order for the sinister and anti-democratic move it is.
"There is a long tradition of protest in Britain that has helped win many of the freedoms we enjoy today such as votes for women and a ban on commercial whaling. Treating direct action as terrorism is a dangerous and worrying escalation of the ongoing crackdown on protest and freedom of speech in the UK.”
