News

Court ruling to decide fate of nearly 3,000 arrested under terror laws

Published

5 months ago

February 12, 2026

Peaceful sign-holders face uncertainty as judges weigh legality of Palestine Action ban

A HIGH-stakes court ruling due on Friday (Feb 13) could determine whether nearly three thousand people arrested for holding protest signs were unlawfully treated as terror suspects.

Judges at the Royal Courts of Justice are expected to deliver a long-awaited Judicial Review decision into the Government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action, a direct-action group campaigning against arms companies linked to Israel.

Campaigners say 2,787 people were arrested across the UK for peacefully displaying placards reading: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”

They argue those arrests – made under terrorism legislation – represent one of the most sweeping crackdowns on non-violent protest in modern British history.

Supporters from Defend Our Juries and its “Lift The Ban” campaign say they will again hold signs outside the court from 10:00am, even if that risks further arrests.

If the ban is ruled unlawful, lawyers say hundreds of pending prosecutions could collapse.

If upheld, more demonstrators could face criminal charges.

A spokesperson for the group said: “The public knows the difference between protest and terrorism. Peaceful people holding signs should never have been treated as extremists.”

***Protestors in Cardigan in 2025 (Pic: File)***

Largest civil disobedience campaign

Organisers describe the protests as the largest UK-wide campaign of non-violent civil disobedience in recent years, with silent vigils held in towns and cities across England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.

They claim counter-terrorism resources have been diverted away from genuine threats to process peaceful demonstrators instead.

Police morale has also been affected, they say, with officers placed in the position of arresting people engaged in silent protest.

Government under pressure

The proscription was introduced by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, who argued the group’s actions crossed the line into criminality.

But critics allege the decision followed lobbying from arms manufacturers and pro-Israel interests, a claim ministers deny.

A recent Channel 4 News documentary examined meetings between ministers and industry representatives, raising further political questions.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer has also faced scrutiny over the Government’s stance after campaign actions targeted property linked to him in Scotland.

Rights concerns

Human rights organisations say the case could set an important precedent for the future of protest laws.

Amnesty International UK warned the ban marked “a substantial departure” from how protest movements are normally handled, while Liberty argued counter-terror powers were historically intended for groups using violence against people.

United Nations experts have also raised concerns that criminalising peaceful assembly risks putting the UK “out of step” with other democracies.

Legal battle

The Judicial Review challenge, brought by Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori, was granted four grounds, including whether the ban breaches rights to freedom of expression and assembly and whether ministers failed to follow proper consultation procedures.

Parts of the Government’s defence were heard in secret under a closed material procedure, a move criticised by civil liberties lawyers.

Campaigners have described the court hearing as a test of whether protest can still be treated as a democratic right.

What happens next?

The ruling, expected mid-morning, could immediately reshape ongoing cases.

If the judges strike down the proscription, arrests and charges linked solely to sign-holding protests may be deemed unlawful.

If they uphold it, campaigners say they will continue demonstrating regardless.

One organiser said: “Whatever the decision, people of conscience will keep standing up. Holding a sign is not terrorism.”

The outcome is likely to be closely watched not only by those arrested, but by campaigners, police forces and civil liberties groups across the UK.

Crime

Scaffolder banned after cannabis smell reported from van

Published

9 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Sarah Jane Absalom

A SCAFFOLDER has been banned from driving for 14 months after an off-duty police officer smelt cannabis coming from his Volkswagen Transporter as it travelled through Slebech.

The report was made to police at around 10.30am on February 15. When officers located the vehicle, they discovered it was being driven by 46-year-old Christopher Bennett.

Further blood tests showed Bennett had 16.8 mcg of Delta-9 tetrahydrocannabinol in his system. The legal limit is 2.

This week Bennett, of Queensdown Gardens, Brislington, Bristol, pleaded guilty to drug-driving when he appeared before Haverfordwest magistrates. He was represented in court by Alaw Harries.

“The defendant is remorseful for his actions and recognises the seriousness of the offence,” Ms Harries told the Bench.

“He suffers significant pain following operations to his shoulders and has been prescribed codeine. But this causes drowsiness, so he began self-medicating using cannabis.

“On the day of the offence, he was in worse pain than usual, so he used cannabis earlier than he normally does.”

Ms Harries said the conviction would have serious financial consequences for Bennett, who works as a self-employed scaffolder.

“His driving licence is fundamental to his livelihood,” she said.

“The financial consequences are going to be significant to him, as well as to those who are dependent on him.”

Magistrates fined Bennett £600 and ordered him to pay a £240 surcharge and £85 costs.

He was disqualified from driving for 14 months.

Crime

Estate agent banned after drug-drive crash in Milford Haven

Published

9 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Tom Sinclair

Alison Walker had nearly five times the legal benzoylecgonine limit in her system

A PEMBROKESHIRE estate agent has been banned from the road after admitting driving through Milford Haven with nearly five times the legal limit of a cocaine metabolite in her system.

Alison Walker, 59, was arrested on February 2 after her white MG was involved in a two-car collision on Great North Road, Milford Haven.

“Fortunately there were no injuries, just damage to the vehicles,” Crown Prosecutor Sian Vaughan told Haverfordwest magistrates this week.

After providing a positive roadside drug swipe, Walker was arrested and asked to provide blood samples. These showed she had 240mcg of benzoylecgonine in her system. The legal limit is 50mcg.

Walker, of Woodland Crescent, Milford Haven, pleaded guilty to drug-driving and was represented in court by solicitor Tom Lloyd.

He told the bench that prior to the offence, Walker had been employed as an estate agent.

“She has a good relationship with her boss, and as soon as this conviction is dealt with and her sentence has been served, he will be happy for her to return to her employment,” he said.

After considering a comprehensive probation report, magistrates disqualified Walker from driving for 20 months.

She was fined £80 and ordered to pay a £114 court surcharge and £85 costs. Walker must also carry out a 12-month community order, during which she must complete 15 rehabilitation activity requirement days.

Crime

Pembroke Dock motorist banned after driving with cocaine in system

Published

10 hours ago

June 30, 2026

Court Reporter

A PEMBROKE DOCK motorist has been banned from the roads after being caught driving with more than seven times the legal cocaine limit in her system.

Naomi Grant, 47, was stopped by police on the night of February 6 as she drove her Vauxhall Astra along the A477 near Pembroke Dock.

After providing a positive roadside drug swipe, Grant, of Cheriton Road, Pennar, Pembroke Dock, was taken for further tests.

Blood analysis showed she had 74mcg of cocaine in her system. The legal limit is 10mcg. She also had 1,200mcg of benzoylecgonine, a breakdown product of cocaine, where the legal limit is 50mcg.

This week Grant, who has no previous convictions, pleaded guilty to two charges of drug-driving when she appeared before Haverfordwest magistrates.

She was represented by solicitor Tom Lloyd, who told the court that his client is currently prescribed a considerable amount of medication for a number of medical issues.

“She also has her own personal assistant as a result of her medical needs,” he said.

“She has done everything that has been asked of her in relation to this offence and has engaged with the Dyfed Drug and Alcohol Service to help her move forward.”

Magistrates disqualified Grant from driving for 12 months and fined her £120.

She must also pay £85 court costs and a £48 surcharge.