Secret Report Undercuts U.K. Condemnations of Pro-Palestinian Group

The British government has fiercely defended its decision to ban a pro-Palestinian group under a decades-old terrorism statute, a designation reserved mainly for Islamic militants and neo-Nazis.

The rationale to outlaw the group, Palestine Action, was based on “clear advice and intelligence” after an “escalating campaign involving intimidation and sustained criminal damage,” Dan Jarvis, the security minister, said on Monday. Activists from the group have vandalized weapon factories and military equipment.

Mr. Jarvis said the group showed a willingness “to use violence in pursuit of its cause” and suggested supporters “may not know the extent of its activities.” Hundreds protesting the ban were arrested last weekend under the law, which also criminalizes public displays of support for groups categorized as terrorist organizations. Typically, such forms of expression are protected in Britain.

But an intelligence assessment that helped shape the government’s decision to ban Palestine Action undercuts some officials’ broad claims about why it named the group a terrorist organization. A declassified version of the report obtained by The New York Times said a “majority of the group’s activity would not be classified as terrorism” under Britain’s legal definition.

It also casts doubt on the government’s suggestion that Palestine Action sought to promote violence against people, a tactic typical of other groups banned under the terrorism law, which include Al Qaeda and the Islamic State.

Members of the group do face serious criminal charges, which stem from episodes that are mentioned in the assessment. Prosecutors have accused one Palestine Action activist of wielding a sledgehammer in an assault that injured two police officers during a break-in last year at a building that belongs to Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapon manufacturer.

Prosecutors have accused others of property crimes, and the group has a manual that “provides practical advice and advocates for serious property damage,” the assessment said. It also noted that the group had publicized its attacks. One of the group’s founders was charged separately with expressing support for Hamas, a designated terrorist group in Britain and the United States, which he denies.

Government officials, including Mr. Jarvis, have said repeatedly that they relied on intelligence advice in deciding whether to ban Palestine Action. The assessment, from March 7, was compiled by the Joint Terrorism Analysis Center, Britain’s independent authority for terrorism assessment within MI5, the domestic intelligence service. The declassified version of the assessment does not provide a complete accounting of the intelligence that police and counterterrorism officials might have collected about the group. A former British diplomat who now writes a blog previously published the report.

The assessment, which detailed Palestine Action’s activities, paints a more nuanced picture of the group than some of British officials’ most critical statements.

For example, it said activists showed willingness to commit violence to achieve their political objectives, noting the sledgehammer attack and property destructions. But the assessment also expressed doubt that the group would explicitly encourage attacks on people, a signature of other groups designated as terrorist organizations.

“Any such call for action would constitute a significant escalation of PAG’s strategy and intent,” it said, using an abbreviation for Palestine Action group.

Elsewhere, it cited the group’s playbook, the Palestine Action Underground Manual, as evidence that the group was engaged in terrorism because the book suggests “breaking into your target and damaging the contents inside,” advice that could result in “serious property damage.”

“PAG commits or participates in acts of terrorism,” the document said. “PAG has conducted incidents that have resulted in serious property damage with the aim of progressing its political cause.”

The three episodes the assessment cites as meeting the legal test of “committing acts of terrorism” relate to property damage. All were at Elbit Systems or connected manufacturing sites.

One of the three was a break-in in Glasgow where activists flew flags and set off fireworks and a smoke bomb on the roof of a weapon factory. It was prosecuted as a “breach of the peace,” not a terrorism offense.

The Scottish police later concluded that “the group had been focused on protest activity which has not been close to meeting the statutory definition of terrorism,” according to documents obtained by The Times and first reported by Private Eye, an investigative magazine.

The assessment explained that the group “primarily uses direct action tactics” to advance its cause, a majority of which “would not constitute an act of terrorism.” It said that most of the property damage linked to the group “is typically more minor” and that common tactics included graffiti, petty vandalism and sit-ins.

When the government announced its ban of Palestine Action, the home secretary at the time, Yvette Cooper, cited the Glasgow break-in, saying that the group had caused “caused over £1 million worth of damage to parts essential for submarines.” Evidence submitted by prosecutors in court said the group caused damage estimated at 190,000 pounds, or about $260,000, with the remaining costs attributed to a “loss of revenue due to site closure.”

The intelligence document highlights the broad reach of the terrorism law. The ban “marks a radical departure from what came before” because of its reliance on property destruction, said Alan Greene, a senior counterterrorism researcher at Birmingham Law School.

“There is nothing in this document that suggests that there is more to PAG than what is publicly known,” he added.

Many see the law’s application to Palestine Action as an assault on free speech and as government overreach. The United Nations human rights chief, Volker Türk, called on the British government to reverse the ban, saying it expanded the concept of terrorism “beyond clear boundaries.”

More than 1,400 arrests have been made under the law banning the group, mostly at protests where demonstrators held signs reading: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”

Palestine Action, which was founded in 2020, supports Palestinian sovereignty and the end of sales of British-made weapons to Israel. The group has a significant following but no formal membership structure. After the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attack on Israel in 2023 and the war that followed, the group ramped up its protests.

The group has damaged facilities linked to military companies, including Elbit Systems. Days after vandals defaced President Trump’s Turnberry golf resort in Scotland on March 8, Ms. Cooper received a recommendation from security officials to ban the group.

In June, activists affiliated with Palestine Action broke into Britain’s largest air base. They sprayed red paint into aircraft engines and damaged planes with crowbars, exposing porous security at the base and embarrassing the government.

Days after the air base break-in, Ms. Cooper put forward legislation proposing the ban to Parliament. The bill sought to ban not only Palestine Action but also two violent international white-supremacist groups.

Lawmakers had to make a choice. They could not oppose the designation of Palestine Action without also blocking the ban on the other organizations.

In a debate over the legislation, several lawmakers from the governing Labour Party and opposition groups condemned the government for clustering the three groups together. Ellie Chowns, a lawmaker from the Green Party, said it had “clearly been done to make it extremely difficult to vote against the motion.”

Mr. Jarvis, the security minister, insisted there was “no political convenience” in the formulation of the ban and that the government was “seeking to ensure the security of our country.”

On July 5, the government enacted the ban, putting Palestine Action on the same legal footing as around 80 national and international groups that the British government has designated as terrorist organizations. The move had wide-ranging ramifications, criminalizing membership, support, financing and other activities related to the group, such as arranging meetings.

Though Palestine Action dissolved, a separate group, Defend Our Juries, has been campaigning against the ban, and Palestine Action has tried to overturn it in London’s High Court. The government won permission to challenge that effort in a hearing set for Sept. 25.