15 Sep Blog: Protest, Proscription and Free Speech
The right to protest is of fundamental importance to a thriving democracy. Protests have played a crucial role in some of history’s most important social movements. From the Stonewall Riots of 1969, to the global climate strikes and the Black Lives Matter protests following the murder of George Floyd; protests have always been essential for enabling members of the public to speak truth to power.
The right to protest peacefully is protected by legal safeguards, including the right to freedom of expression (Article 10) and the right to freedom of assembly (Article 11) under the European Convention on Human Rights (“ECHR”). Nonetheless, in the UK we have seen an increasing incursion on those rights in recent years.
Protestors now face the risk of arrest and prosecution for protest-related offences, including offences under the Public Order Act, and prosecution for civil wrongs such as trespass or wilful obstruction. The Police, Crime, Sentencing & Courts Act 2022 also introduced a new statutory offence of conspiracy to cause public nuisance and granted further powers to impose conditions on any protest which may disrupt day-to-day activities. These powers have been used to hand down lengthy prison sentences to peaceful protestors, including perhaps most notably a group of Just Stop Oil activists who were sentenced in July 2024 to up to 5 years’ imprisonment for joining a Zoom call to discuss plans for a protest on the M25.[1]
On 5 July 2025, the former UK Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper went even further and proscribed the direct-action group Palestine Action, designating them a terrorist group under Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000. This marks the first time a UK-based direct action protest group has been proscribed under counter-terrorism legislation, a decision that has sparked intense legal, political, and public debate.
Background: Palestine Action
Founded in 2020, Palestine Action has campaigned to disrupt the UK arms trade with Israel, particularly targeting companies like Elbit Systems UK, which it alleges supply weapons used in Gaza. The proscription followed a high-profile incident on 20 June 2025, when members of the group entered RAF Brize Norton and defaced military aircraft with red paint.
In Parliamentary debate, Yvette Cooper confirmed the intended impact of their proscription was to make it illegal to be a member of, or to invite support for Palestine Action.[2] She argued that proscription formed a proportionate response to actions taken by the group, in support of their aims, referring primarily to property damage.
Context: the UK Terrorism Act 2000
The Terrorism Act 2000 empowers the Home Secretary to proscribe certain groups, i.e., ban them, where she believes that group is “concerned in terrorism.” The statute defines terrorism very broadly: as the use or threat of serious violence / endangering life / serious risks to health or safety of the public / serious disruption of an electronic system / serious damage to property, where that action is intended to influence the government or intimidate a section of the public to further a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.[3]
The term “concerned in terrorism” is taken to include committing or participating in acts of terrorism; preparing for terrorism; promoting or encouraging terrorism; or is otherwise concerned in terrorism.
Most proscribed groups in the UK have been implicated in large scale acts or threats of violence against the public. The list of proscribed groups, published by the government, currently includes Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, the Atomwaffen Division, the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (the ‘LTTE’ or Tamil Tigers), and the neo-Nazi group National Action[4]. Significant concerns have therefore been raised that the inclusion of Palestine Action, whose activities have primarily involved property damage, represents a significant expansion of the law’s application.
The impact of proscription
Once a group has been proscribed, it becomes a criminal offence to[5] belong to that organisation, but also to:
- Invite support for that organisation.
- Express an opinion or belief supportive of that organisation in a manner that is reckless as to whether the audience will be encouraged to support it.
- Arrange or manage a meeting knowing that meeting is intended to support or further the activities of that organisation or be addressed by a person who belongs (or professes to belong) to that organisation.
- Address a meeting with the purpose of encouraging support for that organisation or to further its activities.
- Wear clothing or carry or display articles in public which would invite a reasonable suspicion that the wearer is a member or supporter of that organisation.
- Publish an image of an item of clothing which would lead to such a suspicion.
The effect of proscription can be seen in the response of the Counter-Terrorism Police to protests challenging the Home Secretary’s decision. Over 2,000 people have now been arrested for showing support for Palestine Action, many of them aged 60 or over. All of those arrested face serious consequences, including a possible prison sentence of up to 14 years.
Challenges to proscription
Proscription is not final. An application for de-proscription may be made under section 4 of the Act and the subsequent decision may be appealed. De-proscription does not affect the period during which the organisation was proscribed.
A decision to proscribe can also be subject to challenge through judicial review, with the Courts capable of quashing the proscription decision altogether. As we reported here, permission to challenge Palestine Action’s proscription was granted by the High Court on 30 July 2025 on the grounds that the proscription arguably constitutes a disproportionate interference with the rights to freedom of expression (Article 10) and freedom of assembly (Article 11) under the ECHR, and that the Home Secretary failed to consult the relevant parties in making that decision. The UN Special Rapporteur on Counterterrorism and Human Rights has been granted permission to intervene in the case, along with DPG’s client Amnesty International UK who has been granted permission to intervene alongside the human rights organisation Liberty on the basis that Amnesty International UK and Liberty have particular expertise regarding the exercise of protest rights and freedom of association, as well as in relation to the internationally accepted definition of “terrorism”.
Conclusion
In March 2023, the CIVICUS Monitor, a global research collaboration that rates and tracks fundamental freedoms in 197 countries and territories, downgraded its rating of the UK’s civic space from “Narrowed” to “Obstructed”, due to the government’s introduction of a range of restrictive laws, particularly on protest, and authorities’ continuous restrictions on protest.[6]
Many of these new provisions and government decisions are now having practical impacts on the freedom to protest and freedom of association in the UK and the decision to proscribe Palestine Action brings these concerns sharply into focus.
As Lord Hoffman in R v Jones [2006] UKHL 16 rightly said: “civil disobedience on conscientious grounds has a long and honourable history in this country. People who break the law to affirm their belief in the injustice of a law or government action are sometimes vindicated by history. The suffragettes are an example which comes immediately to mind”.
This blog post was prepared with contributions from members of our legal team including: Yewande Oyekan, Daniel Carey, Emily Soothill and Ralitsa Peykova. It is for general information and is not intended to be used as legal advice.
[1] The sentences of five Just Stop Oil activities were reduced by the Court of Appeal in March 2025 on the basis that the original sentencing was “manifestly excessive”.
[2] Palestine Action: Proscription – Hansard – UK Parliament
[3] Section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000: Terrorism Act 2000
[4] Proscribed terrorist groups or organisations – GOV.UK
[5] see sections 11-13 of the Terrorism Act
[6] https://monitor.civicus.org/country-rating-changes/uk/
Share this story
