A UK court is deciding whether five Palestine Action activists will be sentenced under terrorism laws after being convicted of causing £212,000 in damages during a protest at a Barclays Bank branch in Burnley, Lancashire, in August 2024. The defendants—Brendon O'Hagan, 28, Amanda Kelly, 31, Hmeera Atiqnisar, 31, Mohammed Malik, 28, and Alma Yaniv, 70—targeted the bank over its shareholdings in Israeli defence company Elbit Systems. They were found guilty of criminal damage but did not face terrorism charges during trial, and neither the jury nor the defendants were informed that such sentencing could apply. On September 4, Preston Crown Court will determine if the offences carry a "terrorist connection," following a ruling by Judge Philip Parry, who previously allowed similar sentencing in a case involving four other Palestine Action activists convicted at Elbit Systems' Filton site.
Raj Chada, a criminal lawyer representing several Palestine Action defendants, described the use of "terrorist connection" laws as "very, very unusual" and said it appears to be applied exclusively in cases linked to this group. Judge Robert Altham, who will make the final decision, previously had a sentencing ruling overturned in 2018 for being "manifestly excessive" in an environmental protest case. Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori called Altham's involvement "shocking." Since the group was proscribed as a terrorist organisation in July 2025, more than 3,500 people have been arrested for showing support, many during peaceful sit-ins in Parliament Square with signs stating, "I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action." A solidarity gathering is planned outside Preston Crown Court ahead of sentencing.
The move to apply terrorism sentencing to non-terrorism charges raises questions about legal consistency when prosecuting politically sensitive protests. This could set a precedent where actions previously treated as civil disobedience are reclassified post-conviction without prior notice. The outcome may influence how future protest movements are legally framed, even when no terror intent was alleged.
Editorial note: AI-assisted opinion, not established fact. Full disclaimer →
