'Draconian' UK terror laws under scrutiny as Palestine Action activists face terrorism ruling over Barclays red paint protest

Human rights groups have warned that treating five Palestine Action activists as terrorists over a 2024 protest at a Barclays bank would mark a dangerous expansion of the UK's counter-terrorism laws, with campaigners telling The New Arab it could set a precedent for criminalising political protest.

The warnings come after the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) argued that five Palestine Action activists convicted over criminal damage at a Barclays branch in Burnley should be sentenced with a "terrorist connection", despite the protest taking place nearly a year before the group was proscribed under UK terrorism legislation.

According to reports, Brendon O'Hagan, Amanda Kelly, Hmeera Atiqnisar, Mohammed Malik and Alma Yaniv were convicted of causing £212,000 worth of damage after smashing windows and throwing red paint at a Barclays branch in Burnley, Lancashire, in August 2024.

The activists said they targeted the bank in the name of Palestine Action in protest at Barclays' financial ties to Israeli arms manufacturer Elbit Systems.

Following last month's convictions, reports said Judge Philip Parry informed both the prosecution and defence that he intended to consider whether the offences carried a "terrorist connection".

However, neither the defendants nor the jury had been informed during the trial that a "terrorist connection" could be considered.

The protest also took place before Palestine Action was proscribed as a terrorist organisation and was not classified as a terrorism incident by the then-Home Secretary Yvette Cooper or government officials at the time.

According to court filings cited by multiple media outlets, prosecutors argue the potential terrorist connection only emerged during the trial, when several defendants gave evidence about their affiliation with Palestine Action and said the protest formed part of the group's wider campaign targeting Barclays.

Could protesters be sentenced as terrorists?

Judge Parry referred lawyers to a recent judgment by Justice Jeremy Johnson, who last month ruled that four Palestine Action activists convicted of criminal damage during a raid on Elbit Systems' Filton factory near Bristol had committed offences with a "terrorist connection".

He attached that judgment when requesting legal submissions on whether a similar designation should apply in the Barclays case.

The earlier case involved Charlotte Head, Samuel Corner, Leona Kamio and Fatema Rajwani, who were sentenced with a "terrorist connection" after damaging 40 military assets belonging to Elbit Systems, including quadcopters, causing more than £1 million in damage.

In a statement, Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori said the latest development was an example of "the floodgates flowing" from Justice Johnson's earlier ruling.

A terrorism sentence would subject the defendants to notification requirements for years after their release, including informing police of new electronic devices, bank accounts, telephone numbers, email addresses, vehicles, relationships and overseas travel plans.

Campaigners warn of 'dangerous precedent'

UK activist group Defend Our Juries told The New Arab that applying a terrorist connection to the Burnley case would represent an unprecedented expansion of anti-terror powers.

"To treat a peaceful protest against Barclays using red spray paint in this was represents a gross expansion of the use of the draconian terrorism laws. It is an insult to the victims of real terrorism and their families," it said.

The group argued that "the use of red spray paint is a basic tool of political protest", pointing to actions by Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil, which it said "have caused far more damage than caused by the Burnley group".

Similar offences committed by those organisations have not been deemed to have a "terrorist connection".

"In the future it seems that the only way not be a terrorist will be either to express support for genocide and climate breakdown or to stay silent," the group said.

Liberty director Akiko Hart also warned the case risked broadening the use of terrorism legislation.

"It further highlights the deep flaws in the UK’s counter-terror laws," Hart told The New Arab. "It also confirms our fears that the Filton 4 sentencing would set a dangerous precedent for how terrorism laws are used to target protestors."

Hart added: "There is an urgent need to update the current definition of terrorism to enable current and future governments to uphold their duty to safeguard the public and national security, whilst protecting people’s rights and preventing overreach.”

Amnesty International UK also warned that treating criminal damage as terrorism risked fundamentally expanding the use of counter-terrorism legislation against peaceful protest.

"It would be completely disproportionate to punish someone for criminal damage as if they were terrorists," Tom Southerden, Amnesty International UK's Law and Human Rights Director, told The New Arab.

"A terrorism sentence stays with you for life, why should anyone be punished more severely for an offence because they did it as part of a demonstration against genocide or any other issue?" Southerden said.

"The misuse of counter-terrorism powers in this country is getting completely out of hand. It is the latest escalation in an ongoing crackdown on our right to protest, one of the most effective tools we have to hold our leaders to account," he added.

"Resorting to sweeping counter-terror powers against direct action protestors has to stop, and the proscription of Palestine Action should be lifted," he said.

According to Declassified UK, the defendants have applied for a pre-sentencing hearing so legal arguments can be heard on whether a "terrorist connection" should be attached to the case. They are due to be sentenced on 4 September 2026.

Founded in July 2020, Palestine Action describes itself as a movement "committed to ending global participation in Israel's genocidal and apartheid regime" by using "disruptive tactics" to target what it calls "corporate enablers" of Israel's arms industry, including British facilities linked to weapons manufacturers.

The UK government proscribed Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation in July 2025 after activists broke into an RAF base in southern England and damaged military aircraft. The ban places the group in the same legal category as organisations such as al-Qaeda and the Islamic State (IS).

The decision has been strongly criticised by campaigners, legal experts and several MPs, who argue that while Palestine Action has carried out criminal damage, its actions do not meet the threshold for terrorism.

Protest groups and Palestine solidarity campaigners have continued to call for the proscription to be overturned, warning that it represents a significant expansion of counter-terrorism powers and a dangerous shift in Britain's treatment of Palestine solidarity activism.

"When those taking a principled stand against genocide are treated as terrorists, we are past the point of being able to speak of a 'right to protest'. There is no right to protest left in Britain," Defend Our Juries told The New Arab. "It has been displaced by the absolute right to burn the planet and murder civilians, as long as it boosts the FTSE 100."