Secret report raises questions over UK justification for banning Palestine Action as more protests planned at Labour conference

Police officers monitor protesters holding a banner during a protest in support of pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action, in Trafalgar Square. (AFP/File Photo)
Police officers monitor protesters holding a banner during a protest in support of pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action, in Trafalgar Square. (AFP/File Photo)
Short Url
Updated 12 September 2025

Secret report raises questions over UK justification for banning Palestine Action as more protests planned at Labour conference

Secret report raises questions over UK justification for banning Palestine Action as more protests planned at Labour conference
  • The Labour government outlawed the group in July under the Terrorism Act
  • Report concluded “majority of the group’s activity would not constitute an act of terrorism”

LONDON: The British government’s decision to ban the pro-Palestinian activist group Palestine Action under terrorism laws is facing scrutiny after a secret intelligence assessment found most of the group’s activity “would not be classified as terrorism,” .

The Labour government outlawed the group in July under the Terrorism Act, putting it on the same footing as around 80 other organizations, including Al-Qaeda and Daesh.

The move criminalized membership, support and financing of the group, and hundreds of protesters have since been arrested for showing solidarity.

Minister of State for Security Dan Jarvis defended the designation, citing “clear advice and intelligence” after what he called an “escalating campaign involving intimidation and sustained criminal damage.”

Palestine Action, founded in 2020, has carried out break-ins and vandalism at facilities linked to Israel’s weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems, and in June activists damaged aircraft during a raid on Britain’s largest air base.

But a declassified March 7 report seen by the NYT, from the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre which is part of MI5, painted a more cautious picture.

It noted that activists had caused serious damage, including one case where a protester attacked police officers with a sledgehammer. It also found the group’s underground manual encouraged sabotage.

However, it concluded “a majority of the group’s activity would not constitute an act of terrorism,” with common tactics being graffiti, sit-ins, and minor vandalism. The assessment also said it doubted the group would encourage attacks on people, something typical of other proscribed groups.

The report identified three incidents that could meet the terrorism threshold, all involving property damage at Elbit-linked sites.

One, a high-profile break-in at a Glasgow factory, was later prosecuted only as a “breach of the peace.” Scottish police records cited by The Times newspaper said the activity “has not been close to meeting the statutory definition of terrorism.”

Former officials and legal experts say the case highlighted how broadly terrorism laws were now being applied.

Alan Greene of Birmingham Law School told the NYT the Palestine Action ban “marks a radical departure from what came before” by relying on property destruction rather than threats to life.

UN human rights chief Volker Turk urged Britain to reverse the measure, warning it expanded terrorism “beyond clear boundaries.”

Home secretary Yvette Cooper, who advanced the ban, told Parliament the Glasgow raid had caused more than £1 million ($1.35 million) in damage to submarine parts, though court evidence put the figure at about £190,000 with the remainder attributed to lost revenue.

British politicians were also forced to vote on Palestine Action’s designation alongside two violent white-supremacist groups, which critics said made opposing the measure politically unfeasible.

Palestine Action formally dissolved after the ban, but supporters continue to campaign against its proscription, which the group is challenging in London’s High Court, with a hearing set for September 25.

The report’s findings were released as campaigners opposing the government’s decision to ban the group said they were preparing a week of demonstrations, beginning at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool later this month and ending with a mass rally in London’s Parliament Square on Oct. 4.

The protest wave was announced on Friday by Defend Our Juries, a group that has led opposition to the proscription, .

It comes a week after 857 people were arrested under the Terrorism Act outside Parliament, where demonstrators displayed signs reading “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”

Organizers described the next phase as a “major escalation” that would pose an “unprecedented challenge” for police, claiming more than 1,100 people have already pledged to risk arrest.

“The blame lies squarely with the government for pursuing this authoritarian ban, plunging an overstretched police force, courts and prisons into further chaos,” a spokesperson said. They urged Cooper to heed MPs, peers, UN experts and party members calling for the measure to be lifted.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer was accused of “grotesque double standards” for meeting Israeli president Isaac Herzog this week while activists faced arrest for displaying cardboard placards. Organizers vowed to target Labour’s conference, beginning Sept. 28, in defiance.

Defend Our Juries has also encouraged nationwide acts of solidarity, asking supporters to place signs in their windows. The move followed a viral video of former Labour councillor Keith Hackett being told by police he could legally display a Palestine Action poster at home but not in public.

Since the ban came into force, more than 1,600 people have been arrested, including religious officials, doctors, veterans and elderly activists. The figure already exceeds arrests made in the UK during the entire post-2001 “War on Terror.” Most detainees have not been charged, though seven alleged organizers appeared in court last week.

The Trades Union Congress this week unanimously passed a motion demanding the ban’s repeal, calling it a “significant abuse of counterterrorist powers and a direct attack on our right to protest against the genocidal Israeli regime.”


Denmark eyes new law to protect citizens from AI deepfakes

Denmark eyes new law to protect citizens from AI deepfakes
Updated 58 min 27 sec ago

Denmark eyes new law to protect citizens from AI deepfakes

Denmark eyes new law to protect citizens from AI deepfakes
  • In the four years since her experience, deepfakes, highly realistic artificial intelligence-generated images, videos or audio of real people or events, have become not only easier to make worldwide but also look or sound exponentially more realistic

COPENHAGEN: In 2021, Danish video game live-streamer Marie Watson received an image of herself from an unknown Instagram account.
She instantly recognized the holiday snap from her Instagram account, but something was different: Her clothing had been digitally removed to make her appear naked. It was a deepfake.
“It overwhelmed me so much,” Watson recalled. “I just started bursting out in tears, because suddenly, I was there naked.”
In the four years since her experience, deepfakes — highly realistic artificial intelligence-generated images, videos or audio of real people or events — have become not only easier to make worldwide but also look or sound exponentially more realistic. That’s thanks to technological advances and the proliferation of generative AI tools, including video generation tools from OpenAI and Google.
These tools give millions of users the ability to easily spit out content, including for nefarious purposes that range from depicting celebrities Taylor Swift and Katy Perry to disrupting elections and humiliating teens and women.
Copyright law
In response, Denmark is seeking to protect ordinary Danes, as well as performers and artists who might have their appearance or voice imitated and shared without their permission. A bill that’s expected to pass early next year would change copyright law by imposing a ban on the sharing of deepfakes to protect citizens’ personal characteristics — such as their appearance or voice — from being imitated and shared online without their consent.
If enacted, Danish citizens would get the copyright over their own likeness. In theory, they then would be able to demand that online platforms take down content shared without their permission. The law would still allow for parodies and satire, though it’s unclear how that will be determined.
Experts and officials say the Danish legislation would be among the most extensive steps yet taken by a government to combat misinformation through deepfakes.
Henry Ajder, founder of consulting firm Latent Space Advisory and a leading expert in generative AI, said that he applauds the Danish government for recognizing that the law needs to change.
“Because right now, when people say ‘what can I do to protect myself from being deepfaked?’ the answer I have to give most of the time is: ‘There isn’t a huge amount you can do,’” he said, ”without me basically saying, ‘scrub yourself from the Internet entirely.’ Which isn’t really possible.”
He added: “We can’t just pretend that this is business as usual for how we think about those key parts of our identity and our dignity.”
Deepfakes and misinformation
US President Donald Trump signed bipartisan legislation in May that makes it illegal to knowingly publish or threaten to publish intimate images without a person’s consent, including deepfakes. Last year, South Korea rolled out measures to curb deepfake porn, including harsher punishment and stepped up regulations for social media platforms.
Danish Culture Minister Jakob Engel-Schmidt said that the bill has broad support from lawmakers in Copenhagen, because such digital manipulations can stir doubts about reality and spread misinformation.
“If you’re able to deepfake a politician without her or him being able to have that product taken down, that will undermine our democracy,” he told reporters during an AI and copyright conference in September.
The right balance
The law would apply only in Denmark, and is unlikely to involve fines or imprisonment for social media users. But big tech platforms that fail to remove deepfakes could face severe fines, Engel-Schmidt said.
Ajder said Google-owned YouTube, for example, has a “very, very good system for getting the balance between copyright protection and freedom of creativity.”
The platform’s efforts suggest that it recognizes “the scale of the challenge that is already here and how much deeper it’s going to become,” he added.
Twitch, TikTok and Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Engel-Schmidt said that Denmark, the current holder of the European Union’s rotating presidency, had received interest in its proposed legislation from several other EU members, including France and Ireland.
Intellectual property lawyer Jakob Plesner Mathiasen said that the legislation shows the widespread need to combat the online danger that’s now infused into every aspect of Danish life.
“I think it definitely goes to say that the ministry wouldn’t make this bill, if there hadn’t been any occasion for it,” he said. “We’re seeing it with fake news, with government elections. We are seeing it with pornography, and we’re also seeing it also with famous people and also everyday people — like you and me.”
The Danish Rights Alliance, which protects the rights of creative industries on the Internet, supports the bill, because its director says that current copyright law doesn’t go far enough.
Danish voice actor David Bateson, for example, was at a loss when AI voice clones were shared by thousands of users online. Bateson voiced a character in the popular “Hitman” video game, as well as Danish toymaker Lego’s English advertisements.
“When we reported this to the online platforms, they say ‘OK, but which regulation are you referring to?’” said Maria Fredenslund, an attorney and the alliance’s director. “We couldn’t point to an exact regulation in Denmark.”
‘When it’s online, you’re done’
Watson had heard about fellow influencers who found digitally-altered images of themselves online, but never thought it might happen to her.
Delving into a dark side of the web where faceless users sell and share deepfake imagery — often of women — she said she was shocked how easy it was to create such pictures using readily available online tools.
“You could literally just search ‘deepfake generator’ on Google or ‘how to make a deepfake,’ and all these websites and generators would pop up,” the 28-year-old Watson said.
She is glad her government is taking action, but she isn’t hopeful. She believes more pressure must be applied to social media platforms.
“It shouldn’t be a thing that you can upload these types of pictures,” she said. “When it’s online, you’re done. You can’t do anything, it’s out of your control.”