The decision to sentence four Palestine Action activists to lengthy prison terms has sparked widespread criticism from civil liberties campaigners, politicians and public figures, who say the ruling sets a troubling precedent for the right to protest in Britain.
Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio and Fatema Zainab Rajwani, part of a group known as the “Filton 25”, were sentenced after targeting facilities linked to Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems.
Around 500 demonstrators gathered in support of the defendants outside the court, with over 100 reportedly arrested for displaying signs expressing support for Palestine Action.
In a ruling that campaigners say is unprecedented, the presiding judge, Justice Jeremy Johnson, found that the offences carried a “terrorist connection” despite none of the defendants having been charged or convicted under terrorism legislation.
Rajiv Menon KC, who represented Head and led the defence team, strongly criticised the terrorism finding, describing the decision as a “chilling, creeping authoritarianism that undermines the very fabric of our society.”
Head and Kamio were given six years in prison, while Rajwani received five years and eight months. Corner received the longest sentence of eight years and eight months after being convicted of criminal damage and grievous bodily harm.
Prosecutors said their actions caused an estimated £1m in damage, destroying computers, drones, and other equipment in August 2024. A police officer was also injured during the incident and suffered a fractured spine.
“Dangerous attack on the right to protest”
The judge said the finding was based on the defendants having caused “serious property damage” and acted with the intention of influencing the UK government. He added that they acted “for the purpose of advancing a political and/or ideological cause”.
As a result of the ruling, all four will be subject to terrorist notification requirements for 15 years following their release.
Advocacy groups expressed alarm at the precedent set by the case.
MEND said the ruling undermined basic principles of due process. “The state cannot invent a terrorist after the verdict,” the organisation said on X.
“This guts the most basic principle of due process of being tried for what you’re charged with, and a jury of your peers decide. Bolt on “terrorism” afterwards and there is no limit to who it can be used against next!,” it added.
Campaign group CAGE similarly warned that the ruling could have implications far beyond Palestine solidarity activism. “Today it’s Palestine Action, but next it’ll be immigration protests, farmers protests, NHS, tax etc.” it said on an X post.
Political figures also condemned the sentences.
Green Party deputy leader Zack Polanski described it as “gut-wrenching to see four young people jailed for direct action against an arms supplier to Israel”.
He said the ruling represented a “truly dangerous attack on the right to protest”.
Former Labour shadow chancellor John McDonnell likewise criticised the sentences, calling them “truly shocking”.
“To impose years of imprisonment for protesting to save lives in Gaza is unjust, especially sentencing on terrorist grounds they were never convicted of by a jury,” he wrote on X.
Before the hearing, around 100 public figures — including novelist Sally Rooney, climate activist Greta Thunberg, actor Brian Cox and comedian Steve Coogan — warned against the activists being sentenced for terrorism offences.
The case comes as the Court of Appeal prepares to consider whether the British government acted lawfully when it proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
The group was formally proscribed by the UK government in July 2025, making membership or support for the organisation a criminal offence.
