Dozens Face Court Over Palestine Action Support, Thousands Await

By Staff, Agencies

Dozens of people facing charges over alleged support for the proscribed group Palestine Action appeared at London's Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday in the first of two days of preliminary hearings.

Judges are struggling to cope with some 2,100 people facing prosecution for holding cardboard signs reading “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action

Thursday's hearing dealt with 28 individual cases. Around 170 people - most of them pensioners - have been charged with the offence of displaying an item supportive of a proscribed organization, which can carry a six-month prison sentence.

"It does seem like the system is having to deal with something it has never dealt with before," former government lawyer Tim Crosland told Middle East Eye.

"You've got very few judges, very few courts that are equipped to deal with this very extraordinary regime."

Most of the defendants at Wednesday's hearing were arrested during the first round of protests challenging the ban in July.

Many of them did not have a lawyer; all of them pleaded not guilty.

The oldest defendant, 83-year-old priest Sue Parfitt, had to have Judge Snow come down from the bench to sit next to her as she is hard of hearing.

When asked for her plea, she said: “I was objecting against the proscription of Palestine Action and I therefore plead not guilty.”

Prosecutor Peter Ratliff said the legal challenge to Palestine Action’s ban is delaying trial dates, with Judge Snow planning 400 trials starting in March—though they may be pushed to 2026 or scrapped if the ban is overturned.

But lawyers and defendants have argued that the plan risks restricting their right to fair trial, as it would not allow enough time for them to give evidence and to hear from expert witnesses.

When one defendant, 72-year-old Deborah Wilde, told the court that the time limit did not allow for her to have a fair trial and that she would like to seek leave to appeal, Judge Snow told her that he was "satisfied that the time was sufficient" and that he was not allowing her more time.

"You've got people thinking, how do we industrialize this process?" Crosland told MEE.

"The sorts of things that are being suggested go against yet another democratic right, which is the right to a fair trial and a fair hearing."