Letter to MP Pippa Heylings Re Palestine Action Proscribed as Terroist Organisation
Dear Pippa Heylings,
I fear constituents such as myself might be the bane of your political life. Perhaps I have become a character in an Alan Bennett story, a gentleman of letters? That’s a depressing thought.
Let me lighten the tone by acknowledging that I believe you are doing a wonderful job as our MP. I genuinely think you are in the role for the right reasons, rather than for personal gain. I don’t feel the need to agree with every decision my political representative makes to maintain that opinion.
I had thought there could be no issue as divisive as Brexit to enter my life. And then, the Israeli-Hamas situation erupted.
You will be well-informed on this matter. Perhaps, given the deeply divisive nature of the issue and the full extent of your workload, you might be hoping to remain neutral on it. From personal experience, I know that anything you say will draw as much criticism as praise—usually, more criticism, as most are quicker with negative feedback than with positive.
We strive to heed what is right rather than what is popular. That is the path—and the only path—of social progress.
I wish to raise with you the recent decision by the government to proscribe Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation. I remain unsure whether this was a sound decision. There is no doubt that Palestine Action has engaged in disruptive protests that have caused substantial damage. As of yet, however, they have caused no harm to life.
Israel has a right to defend itself, and Israelis have a right to live in peace. However, many international organisations agree that Israel’s response to the horrific Hamas attack of October 7, 2023, is disproportionate and could now justifiably be considered ethnic cleansing.
It seems entirely inappropriate that our police force should be engaged in the arrest of people making entirely peaceful protests in response to what is undeniably now a humanitarian crisis. Sweeping up protesters for waving Palestinian flags or stating their agreement with the objectives of Palestine Action does not make them fair game for arrest, nor does it justify the actions of some members of Palestine Action, with whom they may not agree. Suggesting you support what Palestine Action stands for is not the same as endorsing their methods. It is in no way similar to waving a swastika, which would be decalring a clear agreement with the goals of antisemitism. This is a crucial distinction because it touches on our fundamental right to free speech.
Specifically, I ask for the following:
- People should not be arrested for peaceful protesting in relation to the situation in Gaza unless their protests are breaking the law in ways unrelated to their association with Palestine Action.
- I request that you raise with the government the need for the UK to withdraw all support and existing trade with Israel unless and until international reporters are given free and safe access to Gaza, and the accusations of ethnic cleansing and war crimes can be fairly investigated.
Warm regards,
Michael Ellis
On Mon, 21 Jul 2025 at 12:50, Pippa Heylings MP wrote:
Dear Michael,
Thank you for contacting me again on this issue, and for your kind comments.On the proscription of Palestine Action, which was voted on in Parliament recently, I am deeply concerned by the ongoing humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and the actions of the Israeli Government. I have consistently condemned both the unlawful blockade and the expansion of military operations that have brought untold suffering to the people of Palestine.
As outlined in my recent emails and statements from the Liberal Democrats, we continue to press the Government to take meaningful action – including the immediate lifting of the blockade, sanctions on Israeli ministers who advocate the dispossession of Palestinians, a halt to UK arms exports to Israel, and the recognition of a Palestinian state. These steps are essential if we are to make real progress towards a two-state solution that delivers dignity, security, and justice for both Palestinians and Israelis.
During the debate this week, Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson Lisa Smart MP raised concerns about the proportionality of the Government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action, which I have shared below:
However, those laws already exist, and that is not what is in front of MPs today. The question we face is not whether or not these people have committed crimes, but whether someone who merely expresses support for them should face up to 14 years in jail. The bar for which groups should be proscribed as terrorist organisations is rightly set very high. It is crucial that the reasons for these decisions are transparent to maintain the public’s trust in our counter-terrorism framework.
I have listened carefully both to experts who have raised concerns, including those from the UN who were mentioned by the Mother of the House, and to what the Minister has said. I have also seen the Home Secretary’s words about her reasons for making this decision based on damage to property, notwithstanding the Minister’s comments on the use of violence.
Proscribing an organisation solely on the grounds of serious damage to property would, I believe, be unprecedented. To date—I would welcome the Minister correcting me if I have got this wrong—no organisation has been proscribed in the UK exclusively for property damage, as is the case here, according to the Home Secretary’s words on the Government website.
While there may be compelling legal arguments that the actions of Palestine Action have met the legal definition of terrorism in terms of serious criminal damage, the decision to proscribe is ultimately made at the Home Secretary’s discretion. There are still questions as to whether that discretion is proportionate in this case, given the level of threat posed to the general public. I would welcome more details from the Minister on why he believes this is a proportionate response, as I remain to be convinced.
Currently, the maximum custodial term for certain offences relating to membership of, or expressing support for, a proscribed terrorist organisation is 14 years. Yet in instances such as this, where actions, though criminal and damaging, may not pose the same imminent threat to life, a blanket application of such severe penalties risks being disproportionate.
The Home Secretary rightly has substantial powers to take action to keep our country safe, but it is also right and entirely proper that we scrutinise the use of these powers and press the Government to ensure that any use of them is wholly proportionate.”
Crucially, the motion we voted on covered not only Palestine Action but two other groups - the Russian Imperial Federation and Murder Maniacs Club. There is no doubt that the two white supremacist organisations listed clearly meet the threshold for proscription. But the vote was all-or-nothing. Parliament was not allowed to assess each group on its own. That forced MPs into an impossible position. It is extremely disappointing that the government bundled them all up together with no way for MPs to take them individually.
I hope this helps to clarify my position and explains why I abstained on this vote. To be clear, had the vote concerned only Palestine Action, I would have voted against its proscription.
On the import of Israeli settlement goods, the UK Government needs to legislate to stop all trade with illegal Israeli settlements in the Occupied Territories, to ensure that the UK does not contribute to the growth of settlements. I have now signed EDM 1266 to show my support for this measure.
Thank you again for getting in touch.
Yours sincerely,
Member of Parliament for South Cambridgeshire
Comments
Post a Comment