A LANDMARK court case in London could have major consequences for protesters across Wales after campaigners claimed four activists convicted of criminal damage may be sentenced as terrorists.

The case centres on the so-called Filton24, a group linked to Palestine Action, following damage caused at Elbit Systems’ site at Filton, near Bristol — just across the Severn from South Wales.

Although the case was heard at Woolwich Crown Court, its implications stretch far beyond England. Lawyers, campaigners and civil liberties groups say the sentencing could affect anyone in Wales involved in direct action protests, including demonstrations over Palestine, climate change, arms manufacturing, animal rights, or major infrastructure projects.

Four activists were convicted of criminal damage earlier this month after a retrial linked to damage at the Israeli-owned defence company’s Bristol-area facility. Two others were acquitted. The prosecution case concerned an incident in August 2024 in which equipment was damaged during a protest at the site.

Campaign group Defend Our Juries now says reporting restrictions have been lifted, allowing it to report that the court is considering whether the offences had a “terrorist connection” for sentencing purposes.

That does not mean the defendants were convicted of terrorism offences. Instead, the issue concerns sentencing law, under which an ordinary offence can be treated more seriously if the court finds a terrorist connection.

Campaigners say this would be the first time direct action protesters convicted of criminal damage are sentenced in this way.

The case is likely to be watched closely in Wales, where pro-Palestine protests have taken place regularly in Cardiff, Swansea, Aberystwyth, Bangor and other towns since the outbreak of the war in Gaza.

It also has relevance to Welsh campaigners involved in environmental and anti-arms trade activism, particularly because the Filton site sits close to the Wales-England border and within the wider Severn region.

Civil liberties campaigners fear the case could create a chilling effect, with protesters in Wales potentially facing far more serious sentencing consequences for direct action that causes property damage.

The issue is especially sensitive because the defendants were not convicted by a jury of terrorism offences. Defend Our Juries claims the jury was not told that a terrorist connection could later be argued at sentencing.

The group said: “The public will be astonished to learn that in the British justice system a protester can now be convicted of criminal damage for disrupting an arms factory, and then be sentenced as ‘terrorists’ without having been convicted of terror charges.”

Legal row

The case has also drawn attention because of a separate legal dispute involving defence barrister Rajiv Menon KC.

The Court of Appeal has reportedly ruled in Mr Menon’s favour after contempt proceedings were brought over comments made during a previous trial concerning the role of juries and their ability to acquit according to conscience.

Campaigners argue that restrictions placed on the defence prevented jurors from hearing key arguments about motivation, conscience, and the defendants’ beliefs about the use of weapons manufactured by Elbit Systems.

The court, however, will ultimately decide what material is legally admissible and what sentencing framework applies.

Broader implications

For Wales, the central question is whether a sentencing approach developed for terrorism-related offending could now be used in cases involving political protest and criminal damage.

If so, campaigners say activists could face longer prison sentences, stricter licence conditions, and the stigma of being treated as terrorist-linked offenders despite not being convicted of terrorism.

Supporters of tougher action argue that serious damage to defence sites, especially where violence or injury is involved, cannot be treated as ordinary protest.

The sentencing hearing is expected to take place on June 12.

Whatever the outcome, the case is likely to become a major test of how British courts draw the line between protest, criminal damage, and terrorism-related sentencing — with consequences that could be felt by campaigners across Wales.