Palestine Action Defendants Apply to Remove ‘Biased’ Judge

Four Palestine Action activists found guilty of criminal damage want to remove a judge accused of bias from their case after it was revealed he will seek to sentence them as terrorists. 

Mr Justice Jeremy Johnson is also the subject of a formal complaint filed by campaign group Defend Our Juries (DOJ) to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office today, alleging biased and discriminatory conduct. 

The application for him to be recused from sentencing activists Charlotte Head, 29, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona (Ellie) Kamio, 30, and Fatema Rajwani, 21, will be heard on Monday 8 June. 

Justice Johnson is expected to add a ‘terrorist connection’ to their charges under section 69 of the Sentencing Act 2020, despite the jury only convicting them of criminal damage under ordinary criminal law on 5 May. The judge’s plan was kept secret from both the jury and the public, while reporting restrictions were imposed on the UK press. 

Head, Corner, Kamio and Rajwani were convicted at a retrial for their role in an August 2024 raid on an Elbit Systems factory near Bristol, where they damaged Israeli quadcopter drones during the ongoing genocide in Gaza. Corner was also convicted of GBH without intent. They will be sentenced on Friday 12 June. Two other activists, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, were acquitted of criminal damage. 

All six activists, part of a group known as the Filton 25, were previously cleared of the most serious charges of aggravated burglary and violent disorder. At their first trial, the jury could not agree to convict on any charges.  

This is the first case in British history where a judge will attempt to sentence activists as terrorists, without them being charged with terror offences. The only previous case where a defendant was sentenced as a terrorist without a terrorist conviction was the Parsons Green bomber, who was found guilty of attempted murder after planting a homemade bomb on a London tube. 

The defence’s bid to remove Justice Johnson is in part due to his unprecedented attempt to have the lead defence barrister, Rajiv Menon KC, prosecuted for contempt of court –  a move described as “troubling” by the Bar Council.

Menon – who won his appeal against contempt proceedings – was alleged to have breached the judge’s direction that lawyers were not permitted in their closing speeches to invite the jury to acquit on the basis of conscience, a principle known as jury equity. Justice Johnson could still refer Menon to the attorney-general to decide whether to initiate contempt proceedings. 

DOJ’s formal complaint against Justice Johnson, signed by more than 3,000 people including lawyers, law professors, retired police officers and magistrates, alleges that decisions taken by the judge “amount to a pattern of exceptional, biased and discriminatory conduct”. 

This includes his decision to treat the defendants’ desire to prevent Israel killing Palestinian civilians as an aggravating – rather than mitigating – feature. According to the judge, the intention to prevent the deaths of Palestinian civilians is what brings their actions within the scope of the Terrorism Act, as an attempt to “influence the Israeli government”. 

The complaint also alleges that Justice Johnson acted “vindictively” in remanding Head, Kamio and Rajwani to custody after their retrial. They had already spent 18 months in prison before their first trial, and only ten months on bail after the first jury declined to convict them. 

“Denying three young women the opportunity to prepare themselves and their families for a further period in prison was cruel and vindictive and not backed by the prosecution,” the complaint reads.

The British media was not allowed to report that the judge had barred the defendants from speaking about their motivations for joining Palestine Action, and from providing information on the genocide in Gaza or Elbit Systems. Media were also banned from reporting that they could be sentenced as terrorists. The restrictions were lifted on 12 May. 

DOJ, which has coordinated protests against the controversial proscription of Palestine Action since July 2025, will lead a mass act of civil disobedience outside Woolwich Crown Court on 12 June, during the sentencing hearing. 

A DOJ spokesperson said: “Given the widespread concerns that have been raised, Justice Johnson should remove himself from these proceedings. The use of secret terror sentencing – for the first time in British history – against protesters who sought to save lives by disrupting the supply of weapons to Israel, demonstrates the dangerous consequences of Palestine Action’s proscription.

“Sentencing the Filton 4 as terrorists, despite their conviction for an ordinary criminal offence, would establish an extraordinary and deeply authoritarian precedent, allowing countless more protesters to be tried for an ordinary offence, but secretly sentenced as terrorists, without juries knowing this when they convict.” 

Those taking part in the protest outside court will defy the ban by holding signs that read: “Saving lives is not terrorism. I support Palestine Action.” 

More than 3,000 people – many of them elderly and disabled – have been arrested under the Terrorism Act for holding placards that read: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.” More people have been arrested under terror legislation since former home secretary Yvette Cooper’s ban on the direct action group than during the entire war on terror. 

After Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori defeated the government’s case for proscription in an unprecedented high court ruling in February, the Metropolitan police said it would no longer make arrests of people expressing support for the group.  The Met rowed back on this decision just weeks later and resumed arrests. 

The government has appealed the high court’s decision that Cooper proscribed Palestine Action unlawfully, and a court of appeal verdict on the ban is expected on 15 June.