Gal Gadot is 'prosecuting' UK activists under Thatcher union laws

Gal Gadot is ‘prosecuting’ UK activists under Thatcher-era trade union laws

Muslim anti-genocide activist Ani.Says is one of the most hounded humanitarian campaigners by the Starmer regime, for her effective campaigning for the rights and survival of the Palestinian people – and she was arrested again earlier this month by the Met Police. However, it’s now emerged that Gal Gadot is also going after her – or rather, the Met Police are doing it for the actor.

Gal Gadot is going after UK anti-genocide activists

In a video announcement on her Instagram page, she has told her followers that she has the Israel lobby pursuing her directly and is being prosecuted by ‘Z-lister’ Israeli Hollywood actor and former IDF soldier Gal Gadot under Thatcher-era anti-union law for ‘besetting a workplace’:

And in an update a few hours later, Ani said that six other activists are being hounded in the same way:

As the Met admitted at the time, “five people were arrested for harassment and offences under Section 241 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act which deals with wrongfully and unlawfully obstructing access to a workplace. Two of the arrests relate to incidents at previous protests while three relate to offences that took place today”.

Solidarity from us

As the Canary previously wrote, yes Gal Gadot may be Israeli. But the protests were because she once served in the Israel Defense Forces for two years. Previously, Reuters reported:

Gadot served the IDF for two years, a stint which included participation in the 2006 Israel-Lebanon war, which Lebanon gave as its reason for banning the “Wonder Woman” movie starring Gadot when it was released in 2017, the Washington Post

Gadot also claimed it was “unfair” that her movies were being boycotted because she supported Israel.

But there’s a difference between being Israeli and supporting a nation perpetuating violent settler colonial Zionism and working for a genocidal army.

The Canary sends its solidarity to the Gal Gadot 7 in this extension of the Zionist lobby’s war on UK citizens’ free speech and protest rights.

In case you’re lucky enough not to be familiar with Gal Gadot’s performances yet, here’s a short video of her ‘best’ lines:

Featured image via the Canary

Tags: israel palestine

Comments 1

Dave Hansell says:

8 months ago

Presumably, it will also be assumed that anyone turning up at the court on Friday in support of the defendants will also be engaged in ‘besetting a workplace’.

Which, incidentally, is not limited to a workplace but also a house under this section of the Act:

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1992/52/section/241/2011-10-01?view=plain

“241 Intimidation or annoyance by violence or otherwise.

(1)A person commits an offence who, with a view to compelling another person to abstain from doing or to do any act which that person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing, wrongfully and without legal authority—

(a)uses violence to or intimidates that person or his [F1spouse or civil partner] or children, or injures his property,

(b)persistently follows that person about from place to place,

(c)hides any tools, clothes or other property owned or used by that person, or deprives him of or hinders him in the use thereof,

(d)watches or besets the house or other place where that person resides, works, carries on business or happens to be, or the approach to any such house or place, or

(e)follows that person with two or more other persons in a disorderly manner in or through any street or road.

(2)A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or a fine not exceeding level 5 on the standard scale, or both.”

The provisions of which have also been used against anti-fracking and road protests in recent times:

https://greenandblackcross.org/guides/laws/obstructing-workplaces/

In the context of ‘annoyance” and “intimidation” paragraph 1 of the Act refers to “A person commits an offence who, with a view to compelling another person to abstain from doing or to do any act which that person has a legal right to do or abstain from doing,”

However, if what the other person is doing/abstaining from doing is not legal, than the charge cannot hold.

The Rome Statute, Article 25, Paragraph 3:

“3. In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for
punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person:
(a) Commits such a crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or
through another person, regardless of whether that other person is criminally
responsible;
(b) Orders, solicits or induces the commission of such a crime which in fact occurs
or is attempted;
c) For the purpose of facilitating the commission of such a crime, aids, abets or
otherwise assists in its commission or its attempted commission, including
providing the means for its commission;
(d) In any other way contributes to the commission or attempted commission
of such a crime by a group of persons acting with a common purpose. Such
contribution shall be intentional and shall either:
(i) Be made with the aim of furthering the criminal activity or criminal
purpose of the group, where such activity or purpose involves the
commission of a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court; or
(ii) Be made in the knowledge of the intention of the group to commit the
crime;
(e) In respect of the crime of genocide, directly and publicly incites others to
commit genocide;
(f) Attempts to commit such a crime by taking action that commences its
execution by means of a substantial step, but the crime does not occur because
of circumstances independent of the person’s intentions. However, a person
who abandons the effort to commit the crime or otherwise prevents the
completion of the crime shall not be liable for punishment under this Statute
for the attempt to commit that crime if that person completely and voluntarily
gave up the criminal purpose.”

Gadot, in their actions of supporting what the Israeli State is doing by, among other actions, pursuing this legal action against protestors aimed at stopping the illegal Israeli Genocide, is aiding, abetting, and contributing to the commission of that crime in breach of sub-paragraphs (c) and (d) (i) and (ii).

Consequently, it could be argued that the actions which Gadot is engaged in are not legal actions under Paragraph 1 of Section 241 of this 1992 Trade Union Act.