Not terrorist enough? Seriously??
British judges appear to have succumbed to the madness engulfing their country
This is an expanded version of my Times column today (£).
When Britain’s Home Secretary banned Palestine Action last July, many thought this was using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
They thought it preposterous that grey-haired librarians and church wardens were being carted off by the police as terrorism supporters, when they were merely demonstrating support for the group’s stated purpose to “stop the genocide” in Gaza.
They also thought it wrong to accuse Palestine Action of terrorism. This was because it wasn’t murdering people like Hamas or Isis; some members had merely caused criminal damage which should be dealt with by the criminal law.
Such people have therefore welcomed last week’s High Court ruling that the Home Secretary acted unlawfully in proscribing Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
However, this is based on a failure to understand the ruling, the core of which — beneath its convoluted legal argument — is highly disturbing.
Contrary to the assumption made by many people, the court did not rule against the claim that Palestine Action is a terrorist organisation. On the contrary, this was never in dispute and remained unchallenged even by the group itself.
So why didn’t the court agree it should be banned? The answer suggests an alarming equivocation about the danger posed by terrorism itself.
