Five Palestine Action activists in the United Kingdom are awaiting a court decision on whether terrorism-linked offences will be included in their sentencing for vandalizing a Barclays Bank branch. The activists, Brendon O’Hagan, 28, Amanda Kelly, 31, Hmeera Atiqnisar, 31, Mohammed Malik, 28, and Alma Yaniv, 70, were convicted of causing £212,000 ($290,000) in damages during a protest in Burnley, Lancashire, in August 2024. Their protest targeted the bank's shareholdings in the Israeli defence company Elbit Systems.

Preston Crown Court is scheduled to rule on Friday whether the five individuals, due for sentencing on September 4, will face terrorism sentencing. This potential sentencing under “terrorist connection” laws is considered highly unusual by legal experts. The activists were protesting Barclays' financial ties to companies involved in the Israeli arms industry.

According to Raj Chada, a criminal lawyer with Hodge Jones Allen, who has represented Palestine Action activists, the application of these laws is rare and appears to be specifically targeting this group. He noted that the law has only recently been applied and exclusively in cases involving Palestine Action. "Certainly, in our experience, using the law like this is very, very unusual and appears to be being used to target Palestine Action activists whose offence predates the banning of the group,“ Chada stated.

At the time of their conviction, Palestine Action had not been proscribed as a terrorist group. Neither the defendants nor the jury were aware that terrorism charges might be considered during sentencing. However, following the verdicts, trial judge Philip Parry indicated his intention to examine whether the offense carried a “terrorist connection”.

This move follows a similar instance in June, where four Palestine Action activists convicted of criminal damage at Elbit Systems’ Filton site near Bristol were sentenced as terrorists. This sentencing occurred nearly two years after their initial protest. Chada highlighted that, to his knowledge, this was the only other time the law had been used against direct action protest groups, suggesting a pattern of targeting the offense rather than the individuals or the group itself.

The activists' supporters have also raised concerns about the judge, Robert Altham, who will make the final decision on adding a “terrorist connection” to the criminal damage convictions. Questions have been raised regarding his past judicial decisions in similar cases.

The group Palestine Action has been a prominent voice in protests against companies perceived to be profiting from the ongoing conflict in Gaza. Their direct action tactics have drawn both support and criticism, with the current legal proceedings raising significant questions about the boundaries of protest and the application of anti-terrorism legislation in the UK.

The outcome of this sentencing decision could set a precedent for how protest-related offenses are treated in the UK, particularly for groups engaged in activism against corporate or governmental policies related to international conflicts.