Author: admin

Good morning. On Wednesday, MPs including home secretary Yvette Cooper wore sashes to celebrate the legacy of the Suffragettes, whose methods included arson attacks, non-lethal bombings, and disabling railway lines. Then many of them voted to make wearing a Palestine Action t-shirt punishable by up to six months in prison, and membership of the group liable for a sentence of up to 14 years.

The legislation is the result of Cooper’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action. Today, the high court will hear a case brought by co-founder Huda Ammori asking for a temporary block on the order. If it fails, a group which pursues disruptive direct action aimed at buildings, equipment, and institutions rather than violence will be designated a terrorist entity for the first time.

Cooper says that Palestine Action must be banned because it attacks the UK’s defence industry, which is “vital to the nation’s national security”. For today’s newsletter, I spoke to Martha Spurrier, a human rights barrister and former director of Liberty, about a new frontier in the UK’s view of the line between disruptive protest and menacing force.

This is my last newsletter for a while – I’m going on paternity leave, ahead of the imminent arrival of our, er, second edition. Aamna will be with you from Monday, and I’ll be back in the autumn. Here are the headlines.

Five big stories

1. UK politics | The MP Zarah Sultana, who was suspended from Labour last year, has said she will “co-lead the founding of a new party” with Jeremy Corbyn. But Corbyn, who has not yet publicly committed to establishing a formal party, is understood to be frustrated at Sultana’s unilateral announcement and reluctant to take on the title of leader.

2. Diogo Jota | Jürgen Klopp and Cristiano Ronaldo led the tributes from across the football world to Diogo Jota after the 28-year-old Liverpool and Portugal forward was killed in a car accident in Spain. Jota’s brother, André, also died in the crash in the province of Zamora.

3. Middle East | Israel has escalated its offensive in Gaza before imminent talks about a ceasefire, with warships and artillery launching one of the deadliest and most intense bombardments in the devastated Palestinian territory for many months. In all, about 300 people may have been killed this week and thousands more injured, officials said.

4. US politics | The US House of Representatives narrowly passed Donald Trump’s sweeping tax and spending bill on Thursday. The “big beautiful bill” makes sweeping cuts to safety net programs but adds trillions to the national debt through major tax cuts and spending increases on immigration enforcement and the military.

5. UK politics | Rachel Reeves said she is “cracking on with the job” of chancellor after her she was seen visibly distressed in the Commons on Wednesday. Speaking after a public show of unity alongside Keir Starmer at the launch of the NHS 10-year plan, she said she had been upset over a “personal issue”.

In depth: ‘People who can’t afford to be arrested simply won’t show up​’

Yvette Cooper announced the decision to proscribe Palestine Action a few days after activists from the group broke into RAF Brize Norton and spray painted two military planes red.

The home secretary called that incident “disgraceful”, and said it was part of a “long history” of criminal damage that has “increased in frequency and severity”. She said that the attacks had done millions of pounds worth of damage and sparked panic among bystanders, who had been “subjected to violence”. But she did not suggest that Palestine Action is a group devoted to violence as the mechanism for securing its political aims, because it isn’t.

The proscription order was voted through parliament this week – but doesn’t come into force until Saturday. Here’s what you need to know.

---

What’s at stake in today’s hearing?

At the high court today, Huda Ammori will seek an interim order from the judge on the case, Martin Chamberlain, preventing Cooper’s decision from taking effect until a court makes a decision on a judicial review. It is not a full examination of the substantive issues raised by the case, Martha Spurrier said. “It will probably be focused on questions of process: does the complainant understand why the order was made? Has she been given the underlying evidence and the reasons? Has the process been fair, and have the right people been consulted?

“Part of it will be about creating the legal mood music for the judge,” she added. “This has all happened very fast, and the level of the debate has not really been proportionate to the seriousness and novelty of the change, and so they will hope that the judge will find it more attractive to press pause and ventilate the issues thoroughly in court in a few weeks time.”

The government, for its part, is likely to argue that the threat posed by Palestine Action is so serious and immediate that the UK’s national security requires an instant response. If they succeed, the order will take effect on Saturday and place Palestine Action alongside the likes of Islamic State, al-Qaida, and the neo-Nazi group National Action.

Here are some of the consequences. (For more detail, see Netpol’s useful breakdown.)

Membership or encouraging others to support the group will become a criminal offence, punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Informal expressions of support, including through clothes and banners, will become a criminal offence that could attract a six-month prison sentence. (None of this would apply retrospectively, and challenging or protesting the ban itself would still be allowed.)

Organising or attending meetings of as few as three people would be banned along with fundraising or providing logistical support. Payment platforms would face investigation if they facilitated donations.

Intelligence services and police would not be granted new powers of surveillance and infiltration directly, but proscription would likely increase resources flowing to monitoring suspected members of the group and might strengthen the case for warrants.

---

Can the proscripton order still be overturned if the government wins today?

If the government prevails, that is not the end of the story – but the route to overturning the ban becomes significantly harder. “The minute the order is effective it is strengthened by being the status quo,” Spurrier said. “The deference shown to the government on national security issues is enormous.”

Should the case enter the appeals process, the first route is to the home secretary, whose view seems fairly predictable. After that it enters the legal system – but rather than being heard in open court, the case might end up in closed hearings, where Palestine Action would be represented by special advocates under severe limits on what they can share with their clients.

For that to happen, the government would have to demonstrate that it has evidence which presents a national security risk to share publicly. If they succeed, the challenge for Palestine Action becomes incredibly steep, because they will only hear the parts of the case against them that have been agreed by the court not to present a national security risk.

“You can’t answer the specific allegations, whether by saying I wasn’t there on that date, or if you think our modus operandi is X or Y I can prove that it’s not,” Spurrier said. “It’s the special advocate’s job to make the strongest case they can in the absence of their client being able to give them instructions – but fundamentally they are working with both hands tied behind their back.”

---

Is this a new frontier in the definition of terrorism?

In the 1990s, Greenpeace was involved in a number of radical direct actions, like occupying the Brent Spar oil platform so it couldn’t be disposed of in the sea, and destroying a field of genetically-modified maize. When the terrorism bill under which the Palestine Action decision has been made was going through parliament in 1999, Jack Straw, the home secretary at the time, dealt with the question of whether Greenpeace could be caught in the definition.

“I make it clear that the new definition will not catch the vast majority of so-called domestic activist groups,” Straw said. “To respond to a recent example, I know of no evidence whatever that Greenpeace is involved in any activity that would fall remotely under the scope of this measure.”

“I don’t think there’s any evidence that parliament’s intention was that groups like this would be caught by the definition of the terrorism act,” Spurrier said. “This is the first time where the primary accusation is of property damage and not harm to people.”

That obviously opens the way to wider applications in an era where direct action – often over the climate crisis – has become a major political issue, she added. “It’s really unclear to me what the principled distinction would be if Just Stop Oil began another wave of damage to property. There would surely be at the very least a political conversation about whether they should be proscribed.”

Crucially, there are already plenty of laws in place for which members of groups like Palestine Action can be prosecuted for criminal damage – and which do not involve imposing the draconian restrictions of proscription. That is part of a wider political shift in the definition of acceptable protest, Spurrier said.

“I remember giving evidence to MPs about this a few years ago – and it was so noticeable that the fault line, which had always been peaceful or not peaceful, had moved – and suddenly it was disruptive or not disruptive. I had MPs saying to me that if it got in the way of the school run surely it should be banned. So there has been a paradigm shift.”

---

What will it mean in practice?

If the ban goes ahead, “I don’t expect you’ll see white grannies being carted away for carrying a Palestine Action sign,” Spurrier said. “They will be astute in who they arrest and who they prosecute. But you will see communities of colour bearing the brunt of it in the way they always do. And there will be a chilling effect – people who can’t afford to be arrested because they will lose their job or they are just frightened by the prospect, simply won’t show up.”

There are reasons to worry about the broader consequences, including how the ban might interact with a bill going through parliament seeking to criminalise face coverings at protests and expanding the use of facial recognition. It might also lead to children being referred to the authorities under the Prevent scheme if they tell a teacher that their parents support the group, Spurrier said. “There are so many pieces of architecture that can sweep people up for things that aren’t criminal acts but speak to some kind of intention – and then you’re in the dragnet.”

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

With all that in mind, it may seem extraordinary that the legislation passed the House of Commons this week by 385 votes to 26. “I was really disappointed,” Spurrier said. “But, whether you’re talking about protest or asylum or criminal justice, the prevailing view is that a hardened anti-rights, anti-rule of law stance is almost a centrist position. So I was surprised that the numbers were quite so low. But I was never under the illusion that it would meet with serious resistance.”

What else we’ve been reading

• Holloman Lake, a 1965 wastewater pond in New Mexico, was a wildlife oasis until researchers tested strange shoreline foam and uncovered the devastating impact of forever chemicals on the ecosystem. Aamna

• A year after winning the election, Labour is at a low ebb, Polly Toynbee writes. It is time to be honest about the need for significant tax rises, she says – and to “remind citizens that their taxes go to things everyone values most”. Archie

• A jury has acquitted Sean “Diddy” Combs of sex trafficking, convicting him only of transporting male prostitutes. The case hinged on consent: the women said no; he said yes. The jury sided with him, cementing what feminist Moira Donegan calls the #MeToo backlash era. Aamna

• Ahead of the first date of the Oasis reunion tour tonight, I enjoyed Simon Armitage’s tribute: as they return to the stage, “fans will be back on each other’s shoulders or arm in arm, singing gnomic phrases and occasional nonsense, united by some irresistible bond.” Archie

• To save time, people brush their teeth in the shower or wear slip-on shoes. Are these “life hacks” clever conveniences, or a depressing sign of how overstretched, overworked and overwhelmed we’ve all become? Aamna

Sport

Football | “It is impossible not to feel a deep sense of pain, sadness and shared heartbreak at news of the sudden death of Diogo Jota and his brother André Silva,” Barney Ronay writes. He was “the kind of footballer who barely seems to leave a dent in the grass, who, for all the tactical match-smarts seems still to be playing the same endless teenage game.”

Tennis | The British No 1 Jack Draper was taught a grand slam lesson by the veteran Marin Cilic, losing 4-6, 3-6, 6-1, 4-6 in the second round at Wimbledon. Iga Świątek went about her business almost unnoticed as she defeated Caty McNally 5-7, 6-2, 6-1 to reach the third round.

Football | It took under 90 seconds for Esther González to score the first goal for Spain against Portugal in the Women’s Euros, and then they came quickly, finishing up at 5-0. Italy defeated Belgium 1-0 with Arianna Caruso’s stunning, curling first-half goal.

The front pages

The Guardian splashes on “Hundreds killed as Israel steps up Gaza strikes despite ceasefire hope.” The Times leads with “NHS app to give patients a ‘doctor in your pocket’,” while the Mail has “The doctor in your pocket will see you now.” The FT leads on “Big asset managers piled in to gilts as markets dipped during Reeves crisis,” the i Paper has “Pensions face tax hike to pay for Labour welfare U-turn,” and the Telegraph goes with “Corbyn’s hard-left challenge to Starmer.”

Pictures of Diogo Jota, who died in a car crash in Spain, feature on many front pages. The Mirror splashes on “Liverpool star tragedy: Devastating,” for the Sun, it’s “Football has lost a champion,” and the Express leads with “‘Our hearts are broken’ …fans in shock over death of Kop star.”

Something for the weekend

Our critics’ roundup of the best things to watch, read, play and listen to right now

TV
Gaza: Doctors Under Attack | ★★★★★
Several powerful documentaries have emerged on Palestine this year, but this is the most unflinching. Its central thesis: the IDF systematically targets medics in all 36 of Gaza’s hospitals. The pattern they lay out is chilling: first bombardment, then siege, followed by raids with tanks and bulldozers. Medical staff are detained, hospitals destroyed and the forces move on. The aim appears to be long-term devastation and ensuring Palestinians have nothing to return to. The documentary’s slow, methodical unfurling of this thesis is the stuff of nightmares. Stuart Heritage

Film
Heads of State | ★★★★☆
Idris Elba and John Cena return in this gun show from Nobody director Ilya Naishuller, playing a UK prime minister and US president at odds. After a joint press conference goes sideways and derails a Nato-backed energy deal, the two are forced to fly together to repair the damage, only for their Air Force One trip to end in a fiery crash. Elba deftly toggles between Odd Couple chemistry with Cena and romantic tension with Priyanka Chopra. Naishuller delivers action with pratfalls and one-liners. This is the perfect summer movie – fun, fiery, and totally frivolous. Andrew Lawrence

Music
. (Period): Kesha | ★★★★☆
Kesha’s sixth album marks a fresh start, bringing back the artist who once brushed her teeth with Jack Daniel’s and danced with giant penises on stage. Only the piano ballad Cathedral feels fully rooted in her recent legal battles. This is clearly an album designed to put Kesha back at the centre of pop. The songs are strong, full of smart twists, drops, and funny, self-referential lines: “You’re on TikTok / I’m the fucking OG.” The army of collaborators, from Jonathan Wilson to Madison Love, rally behind her. Kesha plays the part of Kesha 1.0 to perfection. For all the lyrical excess, nothing feels forced. Why would it? She’s simply reclaiming the role she created. Alexis Petridis

Today in Focus

Guilty … and not guilty: understanding the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs verdict – podcast

The rapper faced charges often levied at mafia bosses. Anna Betts explains what the jury heard, and Andrew Lawrence tells Nosheen Iqbal what the verdict means for the music mogul

The Upside

A bit of good news to remind you that the world’s not all bad

Spain’s women’s football team has battled systemic misogyny and poor treatment for years, culminating in a World Cup win in 2023 overshadowed by an unwanted kiss from football chief Luis Rubiales.

The incident ignited global outrage and amplified calls for equality. The outcome of the scandal was that it sparked wider social debate in Spain about gender and power, and ultimately gave young women the voice they needed. The players now say that this turning point has led to a positive change.

Player Aitana Bonmatí says, “It was tough to play here; the situation wasn’t good … Now everything is better.”

Bored at work?

And finally, the Guardian’s puzzles are here to keep you entertained throughout the day. Until tomorrow.