The conviction of two Palestine solidarity protest organisers in the UK, after lobbying by the Zionist lobby, is indicative of rising authoritarianism in Europe.
Des Freedman is Professor of Media and Communications in the Department of Media and Communications at Goldsmiths, University of London. He is the co-author of ‘The Media Manifesto‘ (Polity 2020, author of ‘The Contradictions of Media Power‘ (Bloomsbury 2014), co-editor of ‘The Assault on Universities: A Manifesto for Resistance‘ (Pluto 2011), and former Chair of the Media Reform Coalition.
Cross-posted from Counterfire
The right to protest is under attack.
This was dramatically illustrated when two leading organisers of the pro-Palestine movement were found guilty of breaching police restrictions during a mass protest in London on 18 January 2025.
Chris Nineham, vice-chair of Stop the War, and Ben Jamal, director of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, were convicted under the Public Order Act for their roles in a peaceful protest in which a small delegation attempted to lay flowers at the feet of police at the top of Whitehall.
This was a highly political prosecution and an equally political judgement that ran, unusually for a case heard in a magistrate’s court, to more than fifty pages.
The Palestine Coalition had originally been given permission to assemble outside the BBC in order to protest against the Corporation’s biased reporting on Israel’s genocide in Gaza. However, following a campaign coordinated by the Jewish Leadership Council (JLC), the Metropolitan Police commander Adam Slonecki changed his mind and gave permission only for a static protest on Whitehall.
The JLC repeatedly lobbied Slonecki and argued that the ‘cumulative impact’ of the pro-Palestine marches was disrupting the right of people to attend a local synagogue. Yet scant evidence was produced that Jewish worshippers were either threatened or prevented from exercising that right.
The judge, who had previously dismissed a case against Tommy Robinson, ignored the defendants’ case that the police conditions were illegitimate and unnecessary. Similarly, he rode roughshod over video evidence showing police officers waving through the flower-carrying delegation.
The Met immediately crowed about the verdict, warning future protest organisers ‘to understand the importance of cooperating with officers.’ Meanwhile, pro-Israel organisations like the Community Security Trust used the verdict as an opportunity to once again repeat the lie that pro-Palestine marches – regularly featuring a large Jewish bloc – pose a threat to Jewish people.
Outside the Court, Ben Jamal accused the judge of presiding over an obviously unfair trial in which four of its six days were allocated specifically to making the prosecution’s case. The verdict was immediately condemned by a range of MPs, trade unionists and civil-society groups with Human Rights Watch describing it as ‘a travesty of justice and a huge blow to the right to protest.’
Chris Nineham called the verdict ‘grotesque’ and argued that it was an obvious attempt to scare people away from protests. His conclusion: ‘It is an attempt that will not stop us.’
The stakes could hardly be higher. The police have so far refused the Palestine movement’s preferred route for the Nakba demonstration on 16 May, and allowed Tommy Robinison to take over the political centre of London on that day.
The Palestine movement is calling for the biggest possible mobilisation on that day to ensure that the far right cannot stop our movement.
Be the first to comment