In a landmark legal proceeding at Westminster Magistrates’ Court, three pro-Palestine activists have entered not guilty pleas against charges of inciting racial hatred through protest chants. Abdallah Alanzi (24), Haya Adam (21), and Azza Zaki (60) face allegations of using “threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour intending thereby to stir up racial hatred” during a December demonstration.
The case represents the first criminal charges brought under new police guidelines announced by both the Metropolitan and Greater Manchester police forces, which specifically target the chanting of “globalise the intifada” at protests. The police statement warned that “those using it at future protests or in a targeted way should expect police to take action.”
Following an investigation by the Met’s Public Order Crime team that examined multiple chants from the protest, the defendants will now face trial at Southwark Crown Court on March 25th. Outside the courthouse, demonstrators waved Palestinian flags, beat drums, and demanded the charges be dropped.
The case has sparked significant debate about protest language and interpretation. Pro-Palestine activists vehemently deny that “globalise the intifada” constitutes antisemitic rhetoric or incitement to violence, noting that British Jews have been prominent participants in pro-Palestine marches throughout the UK.
Linguistic and historical context adds complexity to the case. The term “intifada” derives from the Arabic root “nafada,” meaning “to shake off” or “to rise up.” While some historical intifadas in Arab history employed peaceful methods, those in occupied Palestine involved both civil disobedience and armed resistance against Israel.
The legal proceedings occur against a backdrop of heightened tensions following October’s deadly attack on a Manchester synagogue that killed two Jewish worshippers. Prime Minister Keir Starmer previously characterized calls to “internationalise the intifada” as essentially “a call to attack Jewish communities around the world.”