466 Arrests in London: Is UK Free Speech Under Threat?

On Saturday, the Metropolitan Police in London detained 466 protestors – the most arrests made in any single operation for over a decade – under the Terrorism Act for supporting Palestine Action. The group was proscribed on 5 July this year, making it a criminal offence to show any support for the organisation “based on strong security advice following serious attacks the group has committed, involving violence, significant injuries and extensive criminal damage” according to UK Home Secretary Yvette Cooper.  

However, the crackdown has reignited debate over whether the UK is sliding closer to heavy-handed suppression of dissent, dressed up as national security, further fuelled by the recent escalation of the Online Safety Act. 

What Just Happened?

The first arrests began around 1pm on Saturday 9 August with a man holding a sign reading “I support Palestine Action”. Action escalated soon after, and the hundreds of arrests included elderly people, a blind man in a wheelchair, and teenagers, all of whom were protesting peacefully. The Met confirmed that eight others were arrested for non-terror offences, including five for assaulting officers, but all 466 reported anti-terrorism detainees were peaceful protestors. Sky News reported that everyone present had indeed expected to be arrested but felt compelled to speak out and defend their right to protest, often feeling guided by their faith and conscience.  

Amnesty International called it “deeply concerning” that police made so many arrests, with the UK’s chief executive Sacha Deshmukh stating “the protestors in Parliament Square were not inciting violence and it is entirely disproportionate to the point of absurdity to be treating them as terrorists. Instead of criminalising peaceful demonstrators, the government should be focusing on taking immediate and unequivocal action to put a stop to Israel’s genocide and ending any risk of UK complicity in it.” 

Behind the Ban: Palestine Action

In early July, a controversial raid at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire saw activists spray two tanker planes with red paint, and cause further damage with crowbars, to protest British military support for Israel’s war with Hamas.  

The co-founder, Huda Ammori, has since won a legal bid to challenge the decision to label the group as a terrorist organisation, and the High Court has ruled that the government’s decision can indeed be reviewed. In the meantime, supporting Palestine Action is deemed on par with al-Qaeda or Hamas, meaning membership in the group or support for its actions are punishable by up to 14 years in prison. 

Ammori’s lawyers described the ban as “unlawful interference” with freedom of expression, and Justice Martin Chamberlain said some of the points presented were “reasonably arguable” and determined that the challenge can be pursued. He said that the ban may indeed conflict with rights to free speech, and that the Home Secretary could have sought wider consultation before going ahead with the ban.  

After the ruling, Ammori said “This landmark decision to grant a judicial review which could see the Home Secretary’s unlawful decision to ban Palestine Action quashed, demonstrates the significance of this case for freedoms of speech, expression and assembly and rights to natural justice in our country and the rule of law itself” 

Why It Matters Right Now

This isn’t just about a hardline response to property damage. People are questioning what this means in terms of drawing a line between dissent and repression, a continuation of an increasingly concerning theme following the UK’s recent censorship of online activities. 

Freedom of expression in the UK appears at risk. Critics argue that the ban, and the resulting arrests, combines peaceful protest with terrorism, and sets a worrying precedent. Even journalists and columnists must tread carefully, lest we be identified as showing support for the protests which in turn back a banned terrorist group, and end up facing imprisonment. 

Amnesty International, Open Rights Group and Article 19 have all criticised the government’s blending of Palestine Action’s ban with the expanding Online Safety Act, arguing that the compounding restrictions amounts to an unprecedented censorship framework. Tech platforms are already increasing their moderation, risking the total shut down of legitimate discussion. 

Is the UK Government Maintaining Order, or Overreaching?

Supporters of the government’s stance argue that law and order must prevail, especially when activists of a group cross a dangerous line by breaking into an RAF base and damaging military equipment. It’s also worth considering that the state itself has the right, and indeed a duty, to act against groups whose methods flirt with terrorism. 

However, the opponents say political protest must be respected, even if it’s a bit uncomfortable. Silencing dissent is a dangerous move towards a repressed population, and when police arrest retired priests, teachers, and even school children for peaceful solidarity, the authoritarian undertones of the policy come to the surface.

From the Police Point of View

The protests have put a strain on authorities’ capacity to cope. Sky News reported that senior leaders of the prison service met to discuss how to manage such a huge number of arrests, given that the male prison estate is almost full. 800 inmates were reportedly moved out of the busiest jails in and around London before the protest took place in order to make room for additional prisoners. 

The Metropolitan Police Federation highlighted the strain on their operational capacities in a statement reading: “Thinking of our colleagues and wishing all assaulted officers well. Remember there are no ‘extra’ police officers – just the same ones having their days off cancelled, having to work longer shifts and being moved from other areas. Officers are emotionally and physically exhausted.”  

For supporters of the protests, this statement could in fact bolster their stance that this was a massive overreaction. In demonstrators’ and onlookers’ eyes, forcing the police to make a huge number of arrests at a peaceful protest actually generates sympathy for the officers having to be involved and the increased pressure put on emergency services – simply because of the group’s ban, not because the protest posed any tangible risk at all for the public.

What Happens Next?

Public pushback could grow, with protests supporting other protests, and drag more people into the battle over free speech. Experts warn that further escalation could see police besieged by sheer numbers.  

We need to wait and see what happens with the High Court challenge, which will proceed after the recent ruling, and might restore balance. Depending on whether Parliament are deemed to have overstepped their mark by Palestine Action’s Proscription, we may even see a complete U-turn in its classification as a terrorist organisation. 

In the meantime, especially with the Online Safety Act now in full effect, platforms may err on the side of silence in fear of liability. That means we could see a reduction, or complete erasure, of even benign pro-Palestine content, to ensure no links with what may remain a terrorist organisation. 

Final Thought

There’s a fine line between supressing dissent and protecting national security. The protest itself was not the problem in the government’s eyes, but rather the group on the placards. If willing to label nonviolent demonstrations as terrorism in the UK, the government risks harming democratic norms. If peaceful dissent can be criminalised, then dangerous groundwork may be being laid for future movements seeking change. 

Join the Conversation

Did the UK cross a line by arresting peaceful pro-Palestine protestors under terror laws? Is the state justified? Or are we really heading towards losing free speech altogether? Add your thoughts below.