In a sweeping move that has drawn national attention, the Metropolitan Police have charged 67 individuals from across Britain with offences related to showing support for the proscribed group Palestine Action. The charges stem from protests held in central London on July 5 and July 12, 2025, and mark a significant escalation in the government’s response to the group’s activities since its recent ban.
According to BBC News, those charged range in age from 21 to 83 and hail from locations as varied as Ipswich, Hackney, Bristol, and Leeds. The Metropolitan Police confirmed that all individuals face prosecution under section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000, which makes it a criminal offence to show support for a banned organisation. The maximum penalty for this specific offence is six months’ imprisonment, though membership or more active involvement with a proscribed group can result in sentences of up to 14 years.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) first authorised charges against 60 individuals on August 15, 2025, with four more added in the days that followed. Three others had already been charged earlier in August in relation to the July 5 protest, bringing the total to 67. All have been notified via postal charge requisitions detailing their charges and court dates, with appearances scheduled at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on September 16 and throughout October—specifically on the 13th, 14th, and 27th.
The background to these prosecutions is the government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action on July 5, 2025. This move followed the group’s claim of responsibility for damaging military jets at RAF Brize Norton and its alleged involvement in a serious assault on staff and police officers at a business in South Gloucestershire, as reported by Sky News. Since the ban, more than 700 people have been arrested for displaying items or otherwise showing support for the group, underscoring the authorities’ determination to enforce the new legal boundaries.
Commander Dominic Murphy, who leads the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command, has been vocal about the rationale behind the crackdown. In a statement quoted by Sky News, he warned, “The notion that by coming out and showing support towards a proscribed terrorist group will overwhelm us is completely misguided.” He added, “The reality for those who have carried out this action is that they are now facing serious charges under the Terrorism Act. If convicted of such an offence, it can have a severe impact on your life or career, potentially restricting your ability to travel overseas or work in certain professions.”
Murphy’s message to would-be demonstrators was unequivocal: “My message to anyone thinking about carrying out similar action in the coming weeks is to reconsider.” He emphasized that thousands continue to attend protests supporting Palestine without running afoul of counter-terrorism laws, but stressed that any breach would likely result in swift arrest and prosecution. “But where we do see offences, people will very likely be arrested and will certainly be swiftly investigated, working closely with the CPS to bring about prosecutions,” he stated, according to BBC News.
The consequences of a conviction under section 13 of the Terrorism Act extend far beyond a potential jail sentence. The Metropolitan Police highlighted that a record of a Terrorism Act conviction appears on the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) database, which is routinely checked by employers and universities. Such a record may lead to refusal of employment, dismissal, or denial of entry to academic courses. Moreover, it can serve as a significant barrier to international travel, with countries like the US, Australia, Japan, and—starting in 2026—the European Union, requiring declaration of criminal convictions and often denying entry to those with terrorism-related records. Membership in professional bodies may also be jeopardized, with disciplinary proceedings and potential removal from the profession a real possibility.
Palestine Action, for its part, has not remained silent. Alongside other campaign groups, the organisation has won permission to challenge the government’s ban in court. The High Court is set to hear their case in November 2025, with the groups arguing that the proscription infringes on the right to free speech and amounts to a gag on legitimate protest. The Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, defended the ban in The Observer, asserting that Palestine Action is “more than a regular protest group known for occasional stunts.” She cited the group’s claimed responsibility for incidents involving violent disorder and aggravated burglary, with the CPS assessing these charges as having a “terrorism connection.”
The government’s stance has been met with mixed reactions. Civil liberties advocates argue that the ban and subsequent prosecutions risk criminalising legitimate dissent and stifling free expression. They point to the large number of arrests—over 700 since the ban—as evidence of an overzealous approach. Supporters of the ban, however, maintain that the group’s actions cross a line from protest into criminality and even terrorism, justifying robust enforcement of the law. The tension between public order, national security, and the right to protest has rarely been more visible.
For those now facing court, the personal stakes are high. The list of those charged includes individuals from a wide array of backgrounds and locations, reflecting the broad appeal of the Palestinian cause and the reach of Palestine Action’s campaign. Names like Pauline Smith of Ipswich, David Kilroy of Plymouth, and Violet Powell of Burley, Leeds, are among the 67 due to appear in court. Their cases will be closely watched, both for their legal outcomes and for what they signal about the future of protest and policing in the UK.
Further prosecutions are expected as the Met’s Counter Terrorism Command continues to pass case files to the CPS. The coming weeks and months will likely see additional individuals brought before the courts, while the legal challenge to the group’s proscription could set important precedents for the balance between security and civil liberties.
As the legal process unfolds, the debate over the boundaries of protest, the definition of support for a banned group, and the proportionality of the government’s response will remain at the forefront of public discourse. The outcome of these cases—and the High Court challenge—may well shape the contours of protest and policing in Britain for years to come.
