By The Guardian (World News) | Created at 2024-09-30 09:20:14 | Updated at 2024-09-30 11:41:02
2 hours ago
Internal government documents show that Home Office ministers and staff tried to influence police and prosecutors to crack down on activists targeting the UK factories of an Israeli arms manufacturer, campaigners have claimed.
Briefing notes, obtained through freedom of information (FoI) requests by Palestine Action, show details of government meetings, predating the 7 October Hamas attacks and Israel’s response in Gaza, intended to “reassure” Elbit Systems UK, an Israeli arms manufacturer, which is subject to a direct action campaign by the campaign group.
Prosecutions of Palestine Action activists, who say they are trying to protect Palestinian lives and stop war crimes, have led to some convictions, including for burglary and criminal damage, but also acquittals by juries and magistrates despite defendants admitting their actions.
As well as Home Office ministers attending meetings with Elbit Systems representatives, the heavily redacted briefing notes show that one was attended by a director from the Attorney General’s Office said to be representing the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). They also show that Home Office officials contacted the police about Palestine Action.
Tim Crosland, a coordinator of Defend Our Juries, which claims that jurors’ absolute right to acquit a defendant according to their conscience is being eroded by judges placing limits on what defendants can say about their motivations, said: “These disclosures, despite the extensive redaction, are the smoking gun on what has been obvious for a while: the government has been trying to put a stop to juries acquitting those who expose and resist corporate complicity in violations of international law and mass loss of life.
“Such political interference is a national scandal that goes right to the top – the corruption of democracy and the rule of law by those with wealth and power.”
A private secretary note dated 2 March 2022 for a meeting between the then home secretary, Priti Patel, and Martin Fausset, the chief executive of Elbit Systems UK, said: “Palestine Action’s criminal activity is for the police to investigate and though they are operationally independent of government meaning we cannot direct their response, my officials have been in contact with the police about PA.”
A briefing note dated 19 April last year for a meeting between Chris Philp, then a Home Office minister, and Elbit, said: “A director from the Attorney General’s Office will be attending to represent the CPS. The CPS declined to participate in this meeting to preserve their operational independence.”
The contents of a section titled “past lobbying” were redacted.
A spokesperson for Palestine Action said the manifestations of independence were contradicted within the same sentences in which they were made.
“What’s going on behind closed doors demonstrates clear evidence of collusion between government, a foreign private arms manufacturer, the CPS, the Attorney General’s Office and the police,” they said. “This clear abuse of power shows how the state is prioritising the interests of Elbit Systems over the rights and freedoms of its own citizens.”
Documents previously revealed through FoI requests suggested Israeli embassy officials in London attempted to get the Attorney General’s Office to intervene in UK court cases relating to the prosecution of protesters.
This month the UK suspended 30 of 350 arms export licences to Israel because of a “clear risk” that they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law, a move pro-Palestinian groups said did not go far enough, but which supporters of Israel condemned as unjustified.
A Home Office spokesperson said: “We fully respect the operational independence of the police and the independent judiciary, which remains the bedrock of our policing model. These meetings took place under the previous government.”
Philp, Patel and Elbit Systems UK were all approached for comment. At the time of publication only Elbit had responded, stating it was proud to be a supplier to the British armed forces.
