The British state has recast protest as terrorism

What the report says

Al Jazeera’s Tony Greenstein argues that Britain’s terrorism framework has increasingly been used in ways that blur the line between violence, direct action and protest. The opinion piece focuses on the Terrorism Act 2000, the government’s power to proscribe organisations, and how those tools have been applied to Palestinian solidarity activism and other political movements. It cites the 2025 ban on Palestine Action as a key example, along with arrests linked to public expressions of support for the group.

The article says the legal definition of terrorism in the UK is much wider than the everyday meaning of the term, because it can cover politically motivated damage to property. It also notes that proscription turns support for a banned group into a criminal offence. Greenstein contrasts this with the treatment of state violence, arguing that the law is mainly directed at non-state actors while leaving state conduct outside its scope. He also discusses the earlier proscription of Hamas in full and says this helped shape how the group is viewed in relation to civilian governance structures.

On Palestine Action, the piece says the group’s proscription has been challenged in court. It refers to a February 2026 ruling that found the ban unlawful, followed by a June 15 appeal decision upholding it. The article also describes the arrests of people carrying placards or otherwise expressing support for the group, saying nearly 4,000 people have been detained and that the Home Office linked most terrorism-related arrests in the year to March 2026 to Palestine Action support. The broader point is that anti-terror laws are now being used in a way that can capture protest activity, especially around Israel’s war in Gaza and related arms-targeting activism.