Lawyers Accuse Home Secretary of Misleading Media Campaign

Lawyers representing Huda Ammori, a co-founder of Palestine Action, have accused Home Secretary Yvette Cooper of conducting a “cynical media campaign” that violates her obligations to the court. This accusation arises from ongoing judicial review proceedings that challenge the decision to proscribe the group under the Terrorism Act. In a letter addressed to the government’s legal department, Ammori’s legal team criticized Cooper’s public statements, asserting they lack support from disclosures made in the High Court.

The letter from Birnberg Peirce emphasizes that the core of Cooper’s media narrative attempts to portray Palestine Action as an organization linked to violence. It states, “At the centre of your client’s media campaign is an attempt to persuade the public that Palestine Action was proscribed for reasons which she is unable to reveal publicly and which are centred on violence and injuries against people.” This claim, the lawyers argue, is misleading, given that public disclosures indicate the recommendation for proscription was primarily based on damage to property, not violence against individuals.

Moreover, the letter highlights that the central advice to Cooper suggested that the proscription of Palestine Action would send a strong message that causing serious damage to property, regardless of the cause, constitutes terrorism. “The proper place for your client to advance her case is in court,” the letter states, condemning Cooper’s media strategy as a fundamental disrespect for judicial proceedings.

The case involves sensitive information, as some evidence presented during the judicial review permission hearing took place in a closed court setting, meaning Ammori and her legal representatives did not have access to it. The letter also references an opinion piece by Cooper in the Observer, where she claimed to have received “disturbing information” regarding Palestine Action’s intentions. The lawyers contend that these assertions were neither raised in open court nor substantiated with evidence.

Further complicating the narrative, Cooper has made allegations that Palestine Action targeted Jewish businesses. The legal team asserts that Cooper was aware that one such business was associated with Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer.

In addition, the letter cites a report from the Times which indicated that Home Office officials suggested Palestine Action “may be funded by Iran.” Conversely, a recent intelligence assessment released to the High Court clarified that the group is “primarily funded by donations,” including crowdfunding and merchandise sales.

The legal representatives conclude by urging Cooper to cease what they describe as her misleading media campaign, underscoring that if she possesses evidence to support her claims, it should have been presented within the court proceedings. “If your client has evidence to support her assertions, this ought to have been disclosed,” they wrote.

In a significant development, Palestine Action became the first direct action group to be proscribed in the UK, joining organizations such as Islamic State and National Action. This week, Amnesty International UK and Liberty received permission to intervene in the judicial review, which is expected to take place in November. The government has been approached for comment regarding the allegations made by Ammori’s legal team.