In a moment that exposed the flimsy nature of the government narrative, Keir Starmer’s government suffered a resounding blow from the UK Supreme Court after it struck down the decision to ban the activist group Pal Action and ruled it unlawful. This was not a mere procedural detail; it was a clear political indictment of a path that chose to criminalise the act of standing by and defending a victim. That same path chose also to shield the aggressor and oppressor.

This is not a matter of competing narratives or conflicting claims. What is happening in Gaza is a crime of genocide, plain and simple. Palestinian blood is not and cannot be considered a matter of opinion, and those who have colluded in spilling that blood through support, arms supplies or political cover, are complicit in the crime. Yet the government attempted to obscure this behind cold terminology and carefully orchestrated statements.

Starmer’s government did not hesitate to pursue young activists who entered factories and facilities implicated in supporting Israel’s war machine, including sites linked to military supply chains and British aerial capabilities. They were treated as threats to national security, while the real threat was, and remains, the continued flow of weapons, funds and intelligence to a state carrying out mass killing of civilians under the pretext of self-defence.

What kind of moral perversion criminalises those who disrupt weapons factories, yet legitimises those who press the button to bomb, maim and kill?

What kind of moral perversion criminalises those who disrupt weapons factories, yet legitimises those who press the button to bomb, maim and kill?

London did not expel the ambassador, nor did it sever diplomatic ties with Israel. It did not impose a comprehensive and genuine arms embargo. Instead, cosmetic measures; a suspension here, a review there, while the bloodshed in Gaza continued and political cover remained firmly in place. What kind of moral perversion criminalises those who disrupt weapons factories, yet legitimises those who press the button to bomb, maim and kill?

Recently it was found that over2,000 British nationals travelled to join the ranks of the Israeli army and partake in war crimes, yet no prosecutions on the scale directed at pro-Palestine activists were brought forward. Fundraising events have been held openly in support of soldiers involved in this genocidal war, often attended by government officials, while prison cells have filled with people of conscience. Dozens, indeed hundreds, have been referred to the courts simply because they refused to allow crimes to be committed in their name

Ameer, who went on hunger strike until his bodily functions were severely damaged, and Zahra and her fellow activists, who sacrificed their health for their stance, received no meaningful attention from Starmer’s government. It saw in their frail bodies only a security problem and in their resilience merely a breach of order. One cannot escape questioning the kind of order that suffocates justice while accommodating bloodshed.

READ: Palestine Action group wins legal challenge in UK over ban as ‘terrorist organisation’

Today, the judiciary restored a measure of dignity without actually ending the ongoing tragedy. It did not restore the health of the sick, nor did it restore the harsh months of suffering, or drop all the cases still hanging over activists. Nevertheless, the ruling delivered a clear message: the law cannot be weaponised as an instrument of political vengeance.

Recently, it was found that over2,000 British nationals travelled to join the ranks of the Israeli army and partake in war crimes, yet no prosecutions on the scale directed at pro-Palestine activists were brought forward.

Recently, it was found that over2,000 British nationals travelled to join the ranks of the Israeli army and partake in war crimes, yet no prosecutions on the scale directed at pro-Palestine activists were brought forward.

On the international stage, names such as Benjamin Netanyahu have become synonymous with one of the darkest chapters in the region’s modern history. Accountability may be delayed, but it will come and justice will have its day. History does not forget, and it does not accept bureaucratic excuses when genocide is at stake.

This is not merely a battle over whether an organisation is placed on or removed from a list. It is a battle over meaning itself: who is a terrorist? Someone who disrupts a weapons factory in protest at the killing of children, or the one who funds, arms and justifies their bombardment?

This farce must end. The course of history must correct itself. The criminal must be clearly named, and those who stood on the right side must be honoured and held in high esteem. The activists who stood in solidarity with Palestine were not outside the law; they were at its moral core.

The failure was never in their outcry or their condemnation. Rather, in the silence of those who claimed to represent justice, even those who once worked in the field of human rights, yet turned a blind eye to the crime.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

© Middle East Monitor