Our Civil Liberties Under Attack

When Protest Becomes Prison: How Courts, Injunctions and New Laws Put 286 Activists Behind Bars Since 2019

What this dataset ultimately exposes is not just a shift in protest policing, but a deeper erosion of civil liberties. When remand becomes routine, when injunctions bypass open justice, and when new offences expand the boundaries of criminalisation, the right to dissent becomes narrower, more conditional, and easier to suppress. Civil‑liberties groups warn that once these powers are normalised, they rarely retreat; they become part of the everyday architecture of state response to public dissent.

A major new dataset co‑published by Queen Mary University of London and Defend Our Juries documents 286 cases of people gaoled for climate or Palestine‑solidarity protest since 2019, totalling 136 years of custodial time and an average detention of 28 weeks in the 256 cases with full data. Researchers say the courts’ growing use of remand, contempt of court and civil injunctions, alongside new protest offences in the Public Order Act 2023, are reshaping how non‑violent dissent is punished in Britain.

Why this matters

These figures mark a shift from short, symbolic penalties for civil disobedience toward prolonged pre‑trial custody and longer sentences. The report finds one in three gaoled for six months or more and one in five for over a year; in 60% of cases the final sentence was more lenient than time already spent on remand, suggesting remand is functioning as punishment before conviction.

The legal mechanisms driving imprisonment

Remand detention. Courts have remanded many protest defendants for months; long pre‑trial custody can exceed statutory expectations and effectively become the principal punishment. The report highlights particularly long remands for Palestine‑solidarity defendants.

Civil injunctions and contempt. Corporations and public bodies increasingly obtain injunctions against “persons unknown” or named activists; breaches are enforced by contempt proceedings that can carry immediate committal to prison. The QMUL dataset records contempt as the most common route to imprisonment.

New criminal offences (Public Order Act 2023). The Act creates offences such as “locking‑on”, tunnelling and interference with key national infrastructure, and expands police powers — all of which raise the risk of criminalisation for tactics long used in direct action. Legal charities warn these changes broaden the scope for prosecution.

Conspiracy and public nuisance charges. Prosecutors have used conspiracy and public nuisance to pursue organisers and planners; these charges carry higher maximum sentences and can be applied even where direct physical harm is absent

Human impact (illustrative snapshots)

Christmas 2024 snapshot: A record 40 activists — aged 22–58 — were in prison over Christmas for climate or Gaza‑related actions, underscoring how many protestors can be detained simultaneously.

Remand hunger strikes and health concerns: Extended remands in high‑profile Palestine‑related cases prompted hunger strikes and UN concern about detention conditions.

⚖️ Civil liberties under strain — and why women are so often the ones holding the line

The pattern emerging from the dataset is not only about protest — it is about civil liberties. Long remands, sweeping injunctions and new offences expand the state’s ability to restrict movement, association and expression. Legal observers warn that these tools, once normalised, rarely remain confined to one political moment. They become part of the everyday machinery of public‑order policing. That is why civil‑liberties groups argue the current trajectory should concern anyone who values the right to dissent, regardless of their stance on climate or Palestine‑solidarity campaigns.

A striking feature of this period is the visibility of women supporting those in prison — partners, mothers, sisters, friends, and fellow activists who keep cases in the public eye. Researchers and advocacy groups note several reasons for this:

• Care labour — Women disproportionately shoulder the emotional, logistical and community work around imprisoned activists: organising visits, fundraising, coordinating legal updates, and sustaining morale.

• Movement continuity — Women often act as the connective tissue of campaigns, ensuring that imprisonment does not sever people from their communities or silence their causes.

• Moral framing — Public support from women frequently reframes these cases not as security issues but as human storeys about fairness, proportionality and the right to speak out.

• Historical pattern — From Greenham Common to anti‑apartheid campaigns, women have long played central roles in defending civil liberties when the state expands punitive powers.

Their presence underscores a simple truth: when civil liberties contract, it is often women who step forward to defend the people caught in the system.

A new report analysing the imprisonment of protestors in Britain

"Breaking Down the Formation of Corbyn and Sultana's New Party: What It Means for the Left"

Jeremy Corbyn and Zara Sultana's new party, Your Party, have officially commenced preparations for its inaugural conference. This milestone comes after a series of extended and damaging public disagreements regarding the party's direction and vision moving forward.

On Wednesday, September 24th, I, like many others, received an email from yourparty.uk/join, marking the second invitation to become a member. The first invitation had been sent out the previous week, apparently from Zara Sultana's team launched on September 18 and then took down. Initially, I joined without hesitation, believing this was a positive step. However, this decision to open up membership exacerbated the public disagreement. Unfortunately, the differences between the two sides persisted for several days until Jeremy Corbyn's faction, team, or whatever term one prefers to use, launched their membership drive and portal. It's quite perplexing and challenging to determine what is occurring behind the scenes, particularly concerning the two MPs and their respective teams.

The email I received from Team Corbyn on the 24th stated: “To join, you must be over 16, a resident in the UK, and you cannot be a member of another political party.” It appears that someone has established these ground rules prior to any constitutional guidelines have been agreed upon.

When it was initially announced that Your Party would be formed, people across the country began organizing meetings with such renewed figure, many of which were supported and facilitated by the Socialist Workers Party (SWP), the Socialist Party, and Counterfire - an organization that doesn't operate as a traditional political party but nevertheless a political party some not all seemingly took part in discussions with Corbyn and his group after the 2024 general election to explore possibilities and assess support for the formation of a new leftist party. For clarification, I have received trustworthy information indicating that there was no pre-party meeting involving Counterfire. Furthermore, I suspect that the SWP did not participate in these meetings, and it appears that the Socialist Party was represented by way of the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition (TUSC).

It feels somewhat unjust then that socialist entities and parties are closed off. If the goal is to establish a Mass Workers' Party, it would seem essential to include everyone who is willing to contribute, for exclusion contradicts the very purpose of building a broad and inclusive movement. 

I, like many others, find myself increasingly disheartened by the recent changes enacted within your party, which, it’s important to note, does not officially exist. My concerns particularly center on the decision-makers responsible for these actions. The announcement made last Monday regarding a conference and assemblies that fail to foster genuine democratic debate and representation has raised significant alarm. With participants chosen to the conference through a lottery system and various delegates attending over the two-day event, this approach appears to favor the dominance of a small elite. Consequently, it diminishes the vital input of those who have actively engaged in grassroots campaigns over the past decade, such as the Peace and Palestine Campaigns.

In the depths of adversity

 Myself and William Herbert

The last time I attended a national demonstration for Palestine, I ran into this legend on Upper Street in Islington.

In the depths of adversity, William Herbert emerged as one of the pioneering vendors of The Big Issue (National) in Britain. Reflecting on his journey during an interview, William gestures to a scar that loops like a watch-chain from his left ear to the corner of his mouth.

I first began selling alongside William in Covent Garden during the early 1990s. His story is both poignant and transformative. The last time I encountered William, he appeared to be in a difficult state, grappling with personal struggles related to relationships and addiction. However, I was overjoyed to reconnect with him 30+ years later, witnessing his remarkable turnaround and feeling immense pride in his accomplishments. I also hold admiration for all the early vendors who, both men and women, have proven to be exceptionally talented salespeople. Their contributions to The Big Issue as a social movement have been invaluable, playing a significant role in reshaping public perception of homelessness and fostering a deeper understanding of the man-made housing crisis.

William Herbert shared, “I got that from racist Millwall supporters.” He recounted it as a harrowing experience. After stepping into a pub for a quick drink, a football fan approached him, and without warning, slashed his face with a Stanley blade while pretending to whisper in his ear.

The injury required 24 stitches—almost as many as his birthdays. For this young man, it was a devastating event that led to paranoia, isolation, and a loss of confidence. The visible scars made him feel unemployable, and he believed that meaningful relationships with women were no longer attainable. In search of relief, he turned to Tennent’s Super, which provided a temporary numbness. “I had to have a beer just to step outside, and eventually, I couldn’t even stay in my own home; I was in such a dire state.” Life on the streets became his reality, marked by rough sleeping, begging, shoplifting, and heavy drinking. The warmth from the vents outside the Empire in Leicester Square became his only source of comfort. Reflecting on that time, he acknowledges, “I was slowly committing suicide.”

It was during this tumultuous period that Herbert discovered The Big Issue, introduced to him by a young woman among his group of rough sleepers. The concept was simple: homeless individuals could purchase the magazine for 10 pence, sell it for 50 pence, and keep the profit. “That was my drink money, and I felt safe knowing I wouldn’t get arrested for it.” He soon realized that earning money through this method felt more rewarding. His pitch in Covent Garden required him to engage with the public and make eye contact, which gradually restored his confidence. Selling the magazine became a source of pride, leading him to describe it as “a life-changer.”

Since 1991, Herbert's journey has not been linear. He has faced setbacks and explored various jobs, some of which did not pan out. His experiences included time in prison. One might view a man who has intermittently sold The Big Issue for a quarter of a century as a failure, indicating a broader failure of the initiative aimed at empowering the homeless.

However, he clarifies, “That would be a misunderstanding.” The magazine has provided him with stability, routine, and dignity. Today, he has a flat, pays his bills, and drinks very rarely. He has reestablished connections with his family.

A swift flash of a knife in a pub altered the course of his life, and such wounds can take years to heal. In this context, The Big Issue has served as a metaphorical 25th stitch, helping to mend his life.  “I don’t make a lot of money selling papers,” he admits.   “I’m not going to be a millionaire, but it has enabled me to move forward.”

Currently, William's pitch is located on Upper Street in Islington, just outside a Budgens supermarket.

The Influence of Pro-Israel Lobby Funding on the British Cabinet

Recent investigations indicate that the pro-Israel lobby has made substantial contributions to the current British government, with 13 of the 25 ministers receiving direct donations from pro-Israel sources or influential lobbyists such as Sir Trevor Chinn. This funding network, which includes organizations like Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) and Conservative Friends of Israel (CFI), reflects a deliberate strategy to align the UK's foreign policy with Israeli interests. During his leadership campaign in 2020, Prime Minister Keir Starmer received a £50,000 donation from Sir Trevor Chinn, which was disclosed only after he secured victory in the election.Prominent figures such as Foreign Secretary David Lammy, Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, and Health Secretary Wes Streeting have also benefited, with Cooper accepting significant sums from Chinn-associated entities while publicly endorsing Israel's military actions in Gaza.

Structural Mechanisms of Influence

The pro-Israel lobby employs a "carrot-and-stick" approach to shape political behaviour, rewarding alignment with benefits like funded trips to Israel and punishing dissent through funding withdrawal or smear campaigns.It is reported that 80% of Conservative MPs are members of CFI, which has financed more than 160 parliamentary trips to Israel from 2012 to 2022. Similarly, LFI funded prospective Labour MPs' visits to Israel before their elections, embedding pro-Israel perspectives early in political careers. This creates a disciplining effect on policymakers, particularly those deemed "equivocal or easily shunned into silence".

Policy Consequences and Ethical Concerns

The financial ties correlate with substantive policy shifts:

1. Military Support: The UK continues arms transfers to Israel and provides RAF Akrotiri for logistical support, despite evidence of war crimes in Gaza.

2. Suppression of Dissent: Home Secretary Cooper, funded by pro-Israel sources, spearheaded the controversial proscription of Palestine Action as a "terrorist" group-a move lobbied for by We Believe in Israel.

3. Diplomatic Alignment: The government dropped commitments to recognize Palestinian statehood and blocked UN resolutions critical of Israel, while Starmer declared unqualified support for Zionism post-Chinn donation.

Systemic Vulnerabilities

The lobby exploits, weak UK transparency laws:

• LFI and CFI operate with opaque funding, refusing to disclose donors despite evidence of Israeli embassy coordination.

• Cabinet members like Cooper accepted £5,000 from Red Capital Private (linked to former LFI chair Jonathan Mendelsohn) while publicly opposing BDS movements.

• Chinn's cross-partisan funding-spanning Labour and Conservative cabinets since the 1980s—demonstrates enduring institutional access.

Conclusion: Democratic Accountability at Risk

The scale of cabinet-level financial dependence on pro-Israel interest-documented by Declassified UK and others-raises critical questions about foreign influence on UK sovereignty[. With 52% of Starmer's cabinet funded by the lobby, and mechanisms suppressing Palestinian solidarity, the government appears structurally compromised in maintaining impartiality on Israel-Palestine policy. This dependency undermines democratic accountability and highlights the urgent need for transparency reforms in political funding.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservative_Friends_of_Israel

https://www.declassifieduk.org/two-fifths-of-keir-starmers-cabinet-have-been-funded-by-pro-israel-lobbyists/

https://scheerpost.com/2025/06/20/sir-trevor-chinn-the-tycoon-who-hijacked-british-democracy-for-israel/