Scottish court approves legal challenge to UK’s Palestine Action ban

Scotland’s highest civil court has authorized a judicial review challenging the UK government’s controversial ban on direct action group Palestine Action, setting the stage for potential constitutional implications. The Court of Session in Edinburgh granted permission for the legal proceeding during hearings scheduled for March 17-18, following a procedural session on February 23.

The legal challenge emerged after former British diplomat Craig Murray petitioned the court to declare Home Secretary Yvette Cooper’s July 2023 order—which outlawed Palestine Action under anti-terrorism legislation—as ‘ultra vires,’ meaning beyond her legal authority. This development occurs alongside a separate judicial review already underway in England and Wales.

UK government lawyers attempted to block the Scottish case by raising two preliminary objections: questioning Murray’s legal standing as a non-member of Palestine Action, and arguing that the Scottish proceedings should not advance while the English review remains pending. However, court documents reveal the judge determined it appropriate to allow the Scottish case to proceed despite the more advanced stage of the English litigation.

Campaign group Defend Our Juries warned that a successful challenge in Scotland could create a constitutional crisis, with the ban potentially overturned in Scotland while remaining enforced elsewhere in the UK. The organization cited Freedom of Information disclosures revealing that Scotland’s counter-terrorism board had concluded in May that Palestine Action’s activities did not meet the statutory definition of terrorism.

The case has sparked allegations of governmental overreach, with critics accusing the former Home Secretary of misrepresenting a 2022 occupation of a Thales arms factory in Glasgow as terrorism. Defend Our Juries claims the ban has created enforcement chaos in Scotland, with inconsistent arrests of peaceful protesters and offers of £100 fines to avoid prosecution, arguing the legislation primarily serves to protect Israeli weapons trade interests.