Two high-profile cases involving the activist group Palestine Action are set to unfold in British courts, highlighting deepening tensions over UK policy towards Israel and the boundaries of protest. The cases, which have attracted significant public attention and sparked heated debate, center on a pair of dramatic break-ins at sensitive sites: the Elbit Systems defence facility near Patchway in Bristol and the RAF Brize Norton military base in Oxfordshire. With trials not scheduled until 2027 and the accused facing lengthy pre-trial detention, the legal and political ramifications are already reverberating.
On August 6, 2024, six individuals allegedly affiliated with Palestine Action broke into the Elbit Systems site, a company linked by campaigners to the Israeli military. According to BBC and NationalWorld, the group was reportedly armed with sledgehammers and whips, and caused more than £1 million in damages during the early-morning raid. The six accused—Finn Collins (19), Harland Archer (20), Salaam Mahmood (19), Moiz Ibrahim (27), Louie Adams (33), and Liam Mullany (33)—were arrested after a series of operations by Counter Terrorism Policing South East. Prosecutors allege their actions had a "terrorist connection," a charge that has intensified scrutiny of the group and its tactics.
These defendants appeared at the Old Bailey on August 22, 2025, charged with aggravated burglary, criminal damage, and violent disorder. They could spend up to 18 months in custody before their case is heard, with a provisional trial date set for February 1, 2027. The court has explained that due to capacity constraints, it cannot try more than six co-defendants in custody at once, which means eighteen other people charged in relation to the same incident are awaiting trials that have been split into three separate groups. A plea hearing for this group is scheduled at Woolwich Crown Court on December 12, 2025, as reported by BBC.
Outside the Old Bailey, a group of protesters gathered as the hearing took place, underscoring the public interest and controversy surrounding both the cases and the government’s response to Palestine Action’s activities. The group, which has repeatedly targeted sites it claims are complicit in the Israeli military campaign in Gaza, was officially proscribed as a terrorist organisation by the UK Government on July 5, 2025. This move, coming just weeks after the Bristol incident, has further polarized opinions on the legitimacy of direct action and the boundaries of dissent in a democracy.
Meanwhile, another major case is developing in connection with a high-profile break-in at RAF Brize Norton on June 20, 2025. According to BBC and Evening Standard, a group of protesters entered the air base in Oxfordshire, using e-scooters to access the site in the early hours. They spray-painted two RAF Voyager planes with red paint and threw crowbars into the engine rotors, causing an estimated £7 million in damages and rendering the aircraft inoperable. Each turbine replacement alone cost £2 million, and the planes were taken out of service for repairs. Fire extinguishers marked with Palestine Action logos and Palestinian flags were found at the scene, and the group later claimed responsibility for the attack in a YouTube video showing footage from the incident.
Muhammad Umer Khalid, 22, of Stockport, Greater Manchester, was arrested on August 1, 2025, and appeared at the Old Bailey on August 22, 2025, charged with conspiracy to commit criminal damage and conspiracy to enter a prohibited place knowingly for purposes prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Kingdom. Prosecutor Jonathan Polnay KC described the break-in as a "sophisticated and carefully planned attack" with a "terrorist connection." Khalid appeared by video link from Wormwood Scrubs prison and was remanded in custody ahead of a plea hearing scheduled for January 16, 2026. The provisional trial is set to begin on January 18, 2027, and is expected to last six to eight weeks. Four others—Amy Gardiner-Gibson (29), Jony Cink (24), Daniel Jeronymides-Norie (36), and Lewis Chiaramello (22)—are also in custody and will appear on the same dates.
Palestine Action has openly embraced responsibility for both incidents, framing them as acts of protest against the UK’s support for Israel’s war in Gaza. In statements and social media posts, the group has argued that its actions are intended to disrupt what it sees as complicity in the ongoing conflict. The government, however, has taken a hard line, with the proscription under anti-terror laws marking a significant escalation in official response. The decision to designate Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation has been met with both support and criticism, reflecting broader divisions in British society over the Israel-Palestine conflict and the role of protest.
Prosecutors in both cases have highlighted the planning and scale of the attacks, with Jonathan Polnay KC emphasizing the "terrorist connection" in the Brize Norton case and arguing that the actions were not spontaneous but "sophisticated and carefully planned." Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb, presiding over the Bristol case, explained that the court’s limited capacity to try multiple defendants at once has necessitated long waits in custody for those charged—a point that has drawn concern from civil liberties advocates and legal observers.
The legal proceedings have also put a spotlight on the UK’s judicial system, with questions raised about the balance between national security, the right to protest, and the presumption of innocence. The lengthy pre-trial detention—up to 18 months for some defendants—has prompted debate over whether justice is being served or delayed. As Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb noted, efforts are being made to bring trial dates forward, but logistical challenges remain.
For the families of the accused and supporters of Palestine Action, the cases have become rallying points, with protests outside courtrooms and on social media. Critics of the government’s approach argue that proscribing the group and pursuing terrorism charges risks criminalizing legitimate dissent and setting a precedent that could be used against other activist movements. Supporters of the government’s stance, meanwhile, contend that the scale and nature of the attacks—targeting military and defence infrastructure—justify a robust response to protect public safety and national interests.
The coming trials are likely to test not only the legal definitions of terrorism and protest but also the broader social and political climate in Britain. With both cases scheduled for 2027, the debates they have sparked show no signs of abating. As the country watches the legal process unfold, the outcome could have lasting implications for protest movements, civil liberties, and the limits of direct action in the UK.
With the accused facing years in custody before their day in court and the government’s unprecedented move to proscribe Palestine Action, the stage is set for a legal and political showdown that will shape the national conversation on protest, security, and justice for years to come.
