Palestine Action Prisoners to Appeal ‘Terrorist’ Sentences

Four Palestine Action activists are seeking to appeal their unprecedented sentencing as terrorists after smashing up military drones at an Israeli-owned arms facility. 

Charlotte ‘Lottie’ Head, Leona ‘Ellie’ Kamio, Fatema Zainab Rajwani and Samuel Corner became the first direct actionists to be sentenced as terrorists in British legal history, despite not being convicted of a terrorism offence. 

They are to appeal their sentences as “manifestly excessive” and their appeal submission argues that the judge was wrong in law to find that the offence of criminal damage in their case had a terrorist connection. 

Simon Natas, partner at ITN solicitors which represents the four prisoners, said there are “strong grounds” for the appeal, which has now been filed. 

Justice Johnson’s sentencing of Head, Kamio, Rajwani and Corner was based on the “serious property damage” clause of the Terrorism Act 2000. The judge claimed that damage to Israeli weapons – including quadcopter drones – at the Elbit Systems facility was done to intimidate Elbit into ceasing operations or influence the government to prevent it from operating.

The appeal, announced today, argues that the judge applied the wrong test to determine whether “serious property damage” took place, that there was no evidence of an intention to influence the government or intimidate any party, and that the direct action was taken for a humanitarian cause rather than a political or ideological one.

The four activists, known as the Filton 4, were found guilty of criminal damage by a jury in May over the break-in at an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, Gloucestershire, and sentenced as terrorists by Justice Johnson in June. The possibility that the ‘terror connection’ could be applied at sentencing was kept secret from the jury until after they had delivered their verdict. 

At a press conference today, Sukaina Rajwani, mum of Fatema Zainab, said it was a “political decision” to add a terror connection to her 22-year-old daughter’s case.

The Filton 4 were prevented from telling the jury about their motivations for destroying Israeli weapons at trial by Justice Johnson but, Rajwani said, the judge was free to “assume” what their motivations were. 

Emma Kamio, mum of Ellie, said: “My daughter was 28 years of age when she took action as a forest school nursery teacher, where she was responsible for 3 to 5-year-olds, going home each night to watch children of a similar age being brutally murdered on social media. This was what led her to take action to try and stop the genocide.” 

The terror connection has increased the sentences of the Filton 4 and will mean they are subject to stringent requirements for 15 years upon release – including needing to notify police of any new device, bank account, address, holiday or relationship. 

Kamio added: “Ellie will be 50 years old before the state harassment ends for her.”

Emergency medicine practicioner Dr James Smith, who has treated Palestinian patients in Gaza during Israel’s genocide, called the actions of the Filton 4 “public health interventions of the utmost importance”. 

Smith described widespread death and injury witnessed by healthcare workers operating in Gaza over the past three years due to quadcopter drones like those destroyed by the Filton 4, and said the “harm done by these killing machines was obscured at trial”. 

The appeal is also being lodged on the grounds that the “terrorist connection scheme” in the Sentencing Act 2020 is incompatible with Article 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), and that the judge’s decision that there should be a terrorism connection was unfair and contrary to Article 6 of the ECHR. 

Article 7, which prevents “punishment without law”, stipulates that a “heavier penalty” than the one that was applicable at the time the criminal offence was committed should not be imposed, while Article 6 protects the right to a fair and impartial trial. 

The appeal submission argues that Justice Johnson was wrong to admit the statement and report of a forensic consultant instructed by Elbit’s insurers as evidence of the extent of harm caused by the four activists, and that the judge should have recused himself from sentencing Head due to his alleged hostility towards her lead council, top defence barrister Rajiv Menon KC.

Menon faces contempt of court charges after accusations he defied an order by Johnson by telling the jury they had the right to acquit according to their conscience. Menon denies he acted improperly and his case has sparked widespread outrage across the legal profession. 

The sentencing has already set a precedent, with Scottish prosecutors seeking to establish a terror connection in the case of seven Palestine Action activists who allegedly spray-painted Donald Trump’s Turnberry golf course.

Head was sentenced to six years less 45 days and was disqualified from driving for four years; Kamio to six years less 45 days; Rajwani to five years and eight months less 45 days; and Corner was sentenced to a combined eight years and eight months for criminal damage and grievous bodily harm (GBH) without intent. 

All four were acquitted of the violent offences of aggravated burglary and violent disorder, and convicted of criminal damage, a non-violent offence, at retrial. Corner’s GBH conviction did not have a ‘terror connection’ added at sentencing. 

The Filton 4’s defence team is awaiting permission to appeal and a hearing date, which they expect will take place within the next two months.