🔗 Share this article

Government papers indicate that ministers proceeded with a outlawing on the activist network even after obtaining advice that such steps could “unintentionally boost” the group’s standing, per leaked government documents.

Background

The assessment report was prepared three months before the legal outlawing of the group, which was formed to take direct action designed to curb UK military equipment sales to Israel.

This was drafted last March by officials at the Home Office and the housing and communities department, aided by national security advisers.

Opinion Polling

Following the headline “In what way might the outlawing of the group be regarded by the UK public”, one section of the briefing alerted that a outlawing could turn into a divisive topic.

It described the group as a “small focused group with reduced mainstream media coverage” in contrast with similar protest organizations such as environmental activists. However, it observed that the group’s direct actions, and apprehensions of its members, received press coverage.

The advisers stated that research suggested “increasing dissatisfaction with Israeli military operations in Gaza”.

Prior to its central thesis, the briefing mentioned a survey showing that three-fifths of the UK public felt Israel had exceeded limits in the hostilities in Gaza and that a similar number supported a restriction on weapons exports.

“These constitute stances based on which the organization builds its profile, campaigning directly to resist the nation’s weapons trade in Britain,” it said.

“Should that Palestine Action is proscribed, their visibility may accidentally be enhanced, attracting sympathy among sympathetic citizens who disagree with the British footprint in the Israeli arms industry.”

Additional Warnings

Officials stated that the citizens were against calls from the certain outlets for strict measures, including a outlawing.

Other sections of the briefing referenced surveys showing the population had a “widespread unfamiliarity” about the network.

The document said that “much of the UK population are probably currently uninformed of the network and would continue unaware in the event of a ban or, upon being told, would continue generally untroubled”.

The outlawing under terrorism laws has led to demonstrations where numerous people have been detained for carrying signs in public declaring “I oppose atrocities, I stand with the network”.

The document, which was a community impact assessment, stated that a proscription under anti-terror statutes could escalate religious frictions and be perceived as state bias in favour of Israel.

Officials alerted ministers and top advisers that proscription could become “a flashpoint for major controversy and censure”.

Recent Events

One leader of the network, commented that the report’s predictions had come true: “Awareness of the concerns and backing of the organization have increased dramatically. The outlawing has backfired.”

The senior official at the time, the secretary, revealed the outlawing in last month, right after the group’s members supposedly committed acts at an air force station in the county. Government representatives claimed the damage was significant.

The chronology of the report shows the outlawing was being planned well before it was announced.

Ministers were advised that a proscription might be perceived as an undermining of individual rights, with the advisers saying that certain people in government as well as the general citizenry may see the measure as “a creep of anti-terror laws into the domain of speech rights and protest.”

Government Statements

A Home Office representative said: “The group has engaged in an escalating campaign entailing vandalism to Britain’s critical defense sites, intimidation, and claimed attacks. Such behavior endangers the protection of the citizens at peril.

“Judgments on banning are not taken lightly. Decisions are informed by a comprehensive fact-driven procedure, with input from a wide range of specialists from across government, the police and the Security Service.”

An anti-terror official said: “Rulings regarding outlawing are a matter for the administration.

“Naturally, counter-terrorism policing, alongside a range of additional bodies, consistently supply information to the interior ministry to support their work.”

The report also showed that the executive branch had been financing periodic surveys of public strain associated with the regional situation.