Government documents indicate that ministers proceeded with a outlawing on the activist network even after obtaining counsel that such measures could “unintentionally boost” the organization’s visibility, per recently uncovered internal briefings.
The assessment report was prepared three months prior to the official proscription of the network, which came into being to engage in activism designed to halt UK weapons exports to Israel.
This was written three months ago by staff at the Home Office and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, aided by national security policing experts.
Beneath the headline “What would be the proscription of the network be perceived by the UK public”, one section of the report alerted that a ban could become a controversial matter.
The document characterized the network as a “limited specialized group with less mainstream media coverage” compared to comparable activist movements such as other climate groups. However, it observed that the group’s activities, and arrests of its supporters, had attracted media attention.
The advisers noted that surveys indicated “increasing frustration with Israel’s defense tactics in Gaza”.
Prior to its key argument, the document mentioned a survey showing that 60% of British citizens believed Israel had exceeded limits in the hostilities in Gaza and that a comparable proportion backed a restriction on arms shipments.
“These are viewpoints around which PAG builds its profile, organising explicitly to resist the nation’s arms industry in Britain,” officials wrote.
“Should that PAG is proscribed, their visibility may unintentionally be boosted, gaining backing among sympathetic members of the public who disagree with the UK involvement in the Israel’s weapons trade.”
The advisers said that the citizens disagreed with appeals from the conservative press for strict measures, such as a outlawing.
Additional parts of the briefing cited research showing the public had a “general lack of awareness” regarding the group.
The document said that “a large portion of the UK population are likely at this time unaware of the group and would stay that way should there be proscription or, if informed, would stay mostly untroubled”.
The ban under anti-terror legislation has sparked demonstrations where many individuals have been arrested for displaying signs in the streets saying “I oppose atrocities, I back the network”.
The report, which was a public reaction study, stated that a outlawing under terrorism laws could heighten inter-community tensions and be seen as official favoritism in favour of Israel.
Officials cautioned officials and high-level staff that a ban could become “a catalyst for major controversy and criticism”.
One leader of the group, said that the briefing’s advisories had materialized: “Knowledge of the matters and popularity of the group have increased dramatically. This proscription has had the opposite effect.”
The home secretary at the time, Yvette Cooper, revealed the proscription in last month, immediately after the organization’s supporters reportedly vandalized property at an air force station in Oxfordshire. Government representatives claimed the destruction was extensive.
The chronology of the briefing shows the proscription was being planned ahead of it was revealed.
Officials were informed that a proscription might be perceived as an assault on civil liberties, with the experts stating that certain people in government as well as the broader population may view the action as “a creep of anti-terror laws into the domain of free expression and demonstration.”
A Home Office representative said: “Palestine Action has carried out an increasingly aggressive series including criminal damage to Britain’s national security infrastructure, harassment, and alleged violence. These actions puts the protection of the public at danger.
“Judgments on outlawing are thoroughly evaluated. They are informed by a comprehensive data-supported system, with assistance from a wide range of advisers from multiple agencies, the police and the intelligence agencies.”
A national security official stated: “Judgments concerning outlawing are a prerogative for the cabinet.
“In line with public expectations, national security forces, alongside a variety of other agencies, consistently provide material to the department to support their efforts.”
The report also disclosed that the central government had been financing periodic polls of community tensions connected to the regional situation.
A seasoned journalist with a passion for uncovering stories that matter in the Czech Republic and beyond.
