More than 100 protest against Palestine Action ban outside US embassy in London

Police started making arrests at a mass demonstration outside the US embassy in Battersea, south London. It was described as the first mass demonstration under Andy Burnham’s premiership opposing the proscription of Palestine Action. The event brought the dispute over the organisation’s banned status directly into public protest.

More than 100 people gathered outside the embassy. They held signs reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.” The Metropolitan police had warned participants before the event that they could be arrested. Officers said supporting a proscribed organisation was unlawful.

Commander Adam Slonecki led the policing operation. He said people who organised the event, instructed others, or provided logistical support were likely to face enforcement action. Defend Our Juries, which organised the demonstrations, accused the Met of being “terrified of facilitating US embarrassment”.

Palestine Action is a direct-action protest network known for targeting organisations and sites it links to Israel’s military activities. The source article does not explain its campaign methods or the government’s case for proscribing it. That wider description comes from established public knowledge, not from the article itself.

In UK law, an organisation is proscribed when the government formally places it on a banned list under terrorism legislation. After that happens, activities such as belonging to the organisation, inviting support, or arranging a meeting to support it can become criminal offences. The exact offence depends on the conduct.

The article applies that legal status to the London protest. Commander Adam Slonecki said those attending knew that supporting a proscribed organisation was unlawful. Police therefore treated some participation, organisation, instructions, and logistical help as potentially enforceable conduct.

The London demonstration drew more than 100 people. They gathered outside the US embassy in Battersea, south London, during the first mass demonstration under Andy Burnham’s premiership opposing the proscription of Palestine Action.

The crowd held signs reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.” This showed the protest’s central message: opposition to genocide and support for the organisation, despite police warnings that support for a proscribed organisation could be unlawful.

A second demonstration was scheduled for the US consulate near Holyrood in Edinburgh. The article does not give an expected attendance figure for Edinburgh. Police activity and possible enforcement therefore formed the immediate context for both planned gatherings, while Defend Our Juries remained identified as the group behind the demonstrations.

The Metropolitan Police warned protesters because Palestine Action had been designated a proscribed organisation. Under UK law, supporting a proscribed organisation can be a criminal offence. The warning was intended to tell people that joining the event could carry legal consequences if their conduct amounted to prohibited support.

Commander Adam Slonecki, who led the operation, said attendees knew that supporting a proscribed organisation was unlawful. He described them as meeting “to purposefully commit a crime”. The Met also warned that people playing key organising roles could face enforcement.

The warning covered more than attendance alone. Slonecki specifically mentioned giving instructions to others and providing logistical support. He said people officers considered to be doing those things would “very likely” be committing an offence. Police then began making arrests at the London demonstration.

Under UK law, proscription is the government’s formal banning of an organisation under terrorism legislation. Once an organisation is proscribed, the law criminalises specified forms of involvement or support. This gives police a basis for investigating and arresting people whose conduct falls within those offences.

The restrictions can cover membership, inviting support, arranging meetings to support the organisation, or expressing supportive views in circumstances that intentionally or recklessly encourage support. The legal question depends on what a person does and, for some offences, what they intend or reasonably understand.

In this case, the Met said supporting Palestine Action was unlawful. Commander Adam Slonecki also identified organising, giving instructions, and providing logistical support as conduct likely to lead to enforcement. The source does not set out the full law or any individual charges, so those details cannot be determined from the article alone.

Defend Our Juries is the campaign group identified as being behind the demonstrations. Its role was to organise the London gathering and the planned demonstration near the US consulate in Edinburgh. The article does not provide further details about the group’s membership or structure.

The group supported demonstrations whose participants held signs saying, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.” That position directly challenged the legal consequences of Palestine Action’s proscription. Police said organising and providing logistical support could itself lead to enforcement action.

Defend Our Juries criticised the Metropolitan Police before or during the London event. It said the Met was “terrified of facilitating US embarrassment”. The group’s organising role therefore placed it at the centre of the dispute between protest organisers seeking to express political opposition and police enforcing restrictions linked to proscription.

UK law generally protects peaceful protest and political expression, including strong criticism of governments and public institutions. Those rights are not unlimited. Parliament can restrict conduct linked to an organisation that the government has proscribed, especially where the conduct invites support, organises support, or otherwise meets a criminal offence.

The London protest shows the tension clearly. Participants held signs reading, “I oppose genocide, I support Palestine Action.” The Met said supporting a proscribed organisation was unlawful. Commander Adam Slonecki also warned that organisers, people giving instructions, and those providing logistical support could face enforcement.

The legal balance depends on the facts and the precise offence, not simply on whether someone holds an unpopular political view. Peaceful opposition to a government decision may remain lawful, while conduct that legally amounts to support may not. The article records arrests but gives no charges or court decisions, so their outcomes remain unknown.