[REVISION HISTORY]

Palestine Action legal proceedings in the UK

Updated 1 time since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-08-22 06:39 UTC → 2026-09-03 18:04 UTC · added ~~removed~~

Legal proceedings involving the activist group Palestine Action have seen mixed developments regarding criminal charges and sentencing. At the Old Bailey, a jury was discharged after failing to reach a verdict on charges against seven activists accused of criminal damage and violent disorder during an August 2024 action at an Elbit Systems weapons factory near Bristol. The prosecution argued the group facilitated the action through reconnaissance, while the defense maintained that association with the group does not establish criminal liability. In a separate ~~legal~~ matter, a judge at Preston Crown Court ruled that five activists—Brendon O’Hagan, Amanda Kelly, Hmeera Atiqnisar, Mohammed Malik, and Alma Yaniv—will not be sentenced under terrorism laws. The group was convicted in June for causing approximately £212,000 in damage to a Barclays bank branch in Burnley, Lancashire, in August 2024. The protest targeted the bank due to its shares in ~~the Israeli weapons manufacturer~~ Elbit Systems. ~~While the judge initially considered a ‘terrorist connection’ due to new information,~~ The activists expressed relief at the ruling, noting they were not informed during their trial that terrorism-related sentencing ~~will proceed for criminal damage rather than terrorism. The individuals~~ could be considered. They are scheduled for sentencing on September 4. Separately, four activists—Samuel Corner, Charlotte Head, Leona Kamio, and Fatema Rajwani—are appealing prison sentences following a raid on an Elbit Systems facility. They were convicted of criminal damage causing an estimated £1.2 million in losses. This case marks the first time in British courts that property damage has been treated as terrorism. Corner, who was also convicted of causing grievous bodily harm to a police officer, received a sentence of seven years and eight months. Due to the terrorism classification, the defendants must serve at least two-thirds of their sentences and face 15 years of terrorist notification requirements. Legal representatives argue the sentences are ‘excessive’ and the classification was ‘wrong in law’.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.