The demonstrations in support of Palestine Action were an inspired piece of public relations by that organisation, but we should not be taken in.
The Terrorism Act 2000 defines terrorism as including action involving “serious damage to property” in support of a political objective. This definition is in line with international norms and seems entirely appropriate. By that test, Palestine Action is a terrorist organisation.
It is dedicated to committing criminal damage against public and private property in protest against Israel’s actions in Gaza and Britain’s alleged involvement in it. It had vandalised property on a number of occasions, even before the break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Criminal damage is not a legitimate form of protest.
Supporting the Palestinian cause and supporting Palestine Action are two quite separate things. Supporting the Palestinian cause is a natural reaction to the appalling scenes of destruction, deliberate starvation and indiscriminate killing by the Israeli army in Gaza. Demonstrating against that is a legitimate form of protest.
Support for Palestine Action is something different. It means not just supporting the Palestinian cause but supporting a method of protest which is violent and criminal. One can express one’s disgust at Israel’s conduct in Gaza without adopting Palestine Action’s methods.
The Terrorism Act creates an offence of supporting a proscribed organisation. It precisely defines what acts amount to support. One of them is wearing, carrying or displaying an article giving rise to a reasonable suspicion that the person supports the proscribed organisation. This is far too wide.
Merely indicating your support for a terrorist organisation without doing anything to assist or further its acts should not be a criminal offence and is consistent with basic rights to free speech. It looks as if Palestine Action has deliberately courted trouble by encouraging people to carry placards with messages specially designed to commit the offence. Martyrdom sometimes has a political value.
It was necessary for the home secretary to proscribe Palestine Action if she wished to disrupt its funding and discourage people from actively assisting its programme of violence. That is a reasonable political objective. Unfortunately, the home secretary cannot proscribe an organisation without also making it a criminal offence to carry placards supporting it.
For the demonstrators, the solution is simple enough. Oppose Israeli violence, but do not support Palestine Action’s violence. For the prosecuting authorities, there is also a simple solution. The director of prosecution’s consent is required for any prosecution of those who have been arrested. Where a demonstrator acted peacefully, he would be wise not to authorise a prosecution. People courting martyrdom should not be indulged.
In the longer term, the right course would be to amend the Terrorism Act so as to redefine in a more sensible way the offence of supporting a proscribed organisation.
Lord Sumption is a former Supreme Court judge and author of the five-volume series, The Hundred Years War (Faber & Faber, £40 each)
