**
In a significant demonstration against the proscription of Palestine Action, over 200 individuals were arrested in Trafalgar Square, London, on Saturday, April 11, 2026. This marked the first mass protest since a high court ruling deemed the group’s ban unlawful, raising questions about the legalities surrounding such demonstrations and the right to protest.
A Rallying Cry for Justice
The protest drew hundreds of participants, many of whom displayed placards with messages such as “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” The atmosphere was charged with emotion as demonstrators, some dressed as suffragettes and others donning masks of prominent political figures, gathered to voice their dissent. The Metropolitan Police reported that by 4:50 PM, a total of 212 arrests had been made, with ages of those detained ranging from 27 to 82 years.
Among the participants was Mike Higgins, a blind disabled man whose previous arrests during protests have sparked public outrage. Demonstrators occupied camping chairs and the ground, holding their signs aloft, while large banners proclaimed messages like “Jurors deserve to hear the whole truth” and “Israel starves kids.”
Police Response and Legal Controversy
Shortly after 1 PM, police began making arrests at the fringes of the gathering. Footage captured officers escorting individuals away from the crowd, including an elderly woman reliant on walking sticks. One protester, as she was apprehended, remarked, “You could be on your way catching real criminals.”
Defend Our Juries, the group that organised the demonstration, voiced their discontent with the police’s actions, emphasising that the arrests contradicted the high court’s ruling. Qesser Zuhrah, a former Palestine Action prisoner and hunger striker, articulated the group’s determination, stating, “We never forsake our cause,” and condemned the British government for its stance regarding the proscription.
Voices from the Crowd
Various demonstrators expressed their frustrations regarding the government’s approach to free speech and protest rights. Ally, a 72-year-old sculptor, described the ban as “blatantly absurd”, emphasising that the erosion of protest rights has become a serious concern in the UK.
Andy Simons, a retired curator, underscored the importance of upholding free speech, saying, “Free speech, as long as it’s not violent, is something we should have.” He wore a sign that read “Free, free speech,” highlighting the ongoing struggle for the right to express dissent.
Notably, musician Robert Del Naja, known for his work with Massive Attack, joined the protest despite potential career repercussions. He stated, “If I get arrested, I feel very confident that this was an unlawful arrest,” defending the protest as a patriotic act against war crimes.
The Legal Landscape Ahead
Shabana Mahmood, the Home Secretary, has been granted permission to appeal the high court’s ruling, with the appeal set for later this month. The high court previously ruled that the government’s proscription of Palestine Action was “disproportionate and unlawful,” noting that the group’s activities did not meet the legal threshold for terrorism.
In response to the high court’s decision, the Metropolitan Police initially announced they would halt arrests related to the proscription. However, following the Home Secretary’s appeal, the police revised their strategy, asserting they would continue to enforce the law where necessary.
Commander Claire Smart of the Metropolitan Police warned demonstrators that supporting a proscribed organisation could lead to legal consequences under the Terrorism Act. However, Defend Our Juries countered these claims, insisting that their actions were peaceful and did not involve any attempts to obstruct police activity.
Why it Matters
The events of April 11 reflect a broader struggle over the right to protest and the legal boundaries of dissent in the UK. With over 200 arrests occurring amidst a backdrop of legal and moral debates surrounding the proscription of Palestine Action, the implications extend far beyond this single demonstration. As the government navigates the complexities of national security and civil liberties, the outcomes of these protests and subsequent legal battles will significantly impact the landscape of free speech and activism in Britain, raising critical questions about the balance between security and democratic rights.