Pro-Palestine protesters found guilty

Chris Nineham and Ben Jamal, two well-known protest organisers, were convicted in the UK for defying police restrictions. Their convictions stem from a planned protest in London last January against the UK’s complicity in the genocide in Gaza.

The conviction follows charges brought under the Public Order Act, finding the organisers guilty on two counts.

Chris Nineham, 62, is the vice-chair of the Stop the War Coalition and Ben Jamal, 61, is chair of the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign. The protest route to the BBC had been approved in advance at the end of November. Nevertheless, late restrictions were imposed by the police due to potential disruption to a local synagogue.

Yet again, this ruling is likely a sharp blow to pro-Palestinian advocacy groups as it exposes the systemic threats to the rights of protest in the UK.

🚨NEW: pic.twitter.com/FsMNrlDvBN

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) April 1, 2026

Pro-Palestine censorship

This case has drawn major criticism from the public, with heightened concerns amongst pro-Palestinian activists that the pro-Israeli interests are superseding our right to protest in the UK.

Since October 7, 2023, the UK has seen more than 20 national protests against the genocide on Gaza whilst calling for the UK government to end its long-standing and unqualified support for Israel. Typically, protests tend to proceed as marches through central London, yet the police enforced restrictions often require a static rally instead.

These restrictions have undoubtedly chilled protesters, undermining their right to demonstrate and blocking their efforts to challenge the BBC’s biased coverage of Israel’s latest barbaric war on Palestinians. A ‘war’ which the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have ruled amounts to a plausible genocide.

When the prosecution called him to testify, Metropolitan Police Commander Adam Slonecki, who managed the operation, acknowledged that a protest outside the BBC would be “legitimate” because it is a “public institution”. Yet he also explained that concerns about potential disruption to a local synagogue led the Met to impose restrictions on the protest, even after it had already been approved.

Middle East Eye reported:

the Metropolitan Police altered the route following objections from pro-Israel groups, the chief rabbi, Ephraim Mirvis, and several MPs.

The charges relate to a speech made by Jamal towards a crowd of protestors. Subsequently, a march towards the BBC followed which seemingly overwhelmed police officers. The judge presiding over the case declared his speech, which referred to protest leaders planning to try to walk towards the BBC in resistance to the clear censorship at play, as “incitement”.

Summers KC: Anti-protest laws are “Unlawful”

Once again, the police and government officials manipulate and weaponise righteous anger while presenting punitive, authoritarian policies as “fair”. This repressive dichotomy only serves the interests of the status quo and the most powerful in society, while weakening the collective power of ordinary people.

District Judge Daniel Sternberg delivered the judgement following a 3-day trial, saying:

The court emphasised that protest rights while fundamental, are not absolute and do not permit breaching lawfully imposed restrictions.

Needless to say, this judgment only heightens threats to our right to protest, as it clearly empowers the police to impose restrictions that directly neuter the impact of demonstrations.

Middle East Eye reported:

Kevin Dent KC, representing the British government, showed the court a video of a speech made in January 2025 in which Jamal told a crowd that he and other protest leaders planned to attempt to walk towards the BBC’s headquarters to protest the corporation’s reporting of the genocide in Gaza as an example of “incitement”.

Defence Barrister Mark Summers lambasted the case as “unlawful”, referring to a prior Court of Appeal ruling this legislation unlawful as it grants the police “unlimited powers” in restricting protests.

The ruling referred to came in 2025 which found in favour of Human Rights organisation Liberty, with the government losing its appeal. Liberty inform:

then-Home Secretary Suella Braverman did not have the power to create a new law that lowered the threshold of when the police can impose conditions on protests from anything that caused ‘serious disruption’ to anything that was deemed as causing ‘more than minor’ disruption.

Summers also suggested that, as opposed to protesters breaking the police line, the “clusterfuck” was due to chaotic and reactive policing. Pointing to operational confusion, poor communication and the clear inability to manage large numbers, Summers laid the blame at the feet of the Met Police.

Nonetheless, despite referring to this highly relevant appeal and correlating factors at play in this case, Sternberg found against the protest organisers.

Funny that.

Outside court, @johnmcdonnellMP reacts to the news that @STWuk Chris Nineham and @PSCupdates Ben Jamal have been found guilty of trumped up charges around a pro-Palestine protest last year. The law is an ass. pic.twitter.com/lsmnAKjZZ6

— Canary (@TheCanaryUK) April 1, 2026

The government are working to make protest powerless

It is clear that the government are refusing to back down in its attempts to intimidate and bully British citizens into no longer standing by our Palestinian comrades. Heavily funded by the Israel Lobby, Starmer’s government have long ignored and diminished rising islamophobia, whilst unduly declaring anti-Zionist positions as antisemitic.

Jamal and Nineham plan to appeal this judgement, and rightfully so, as this precedent can only be an omen for advocates across the country.

After all, whether you are pro-Palestinian or not, the ability to protest is a fundamental pillar stone of a functioning democracy. It is the way in which ordinary people speak truth to those in power.

When police powers restrict the ability to protest, they don’t just enforce the law – they silence dissent, weaken collective voices, and threaten the very heart of democratic freedom.

Therefore, defending the right to protest is defending our power to demand justice, at home and in Palestine.

Featured image via the Canary