The police in Britain have used a counterterrorism law to arrest three people over a pro-Palestinian group’s recent incursion at a British military base in a rare use of such powers against acts of vandalism.
This week, the British government announced an intention to ban the group, called Palestine Action.
The arrests were made on Thursday under a 2000 law that allows enhanced detention for those “suspected to be a terrorist,” the police said. The powers are commonly used against people suspected of planning jihadist or far-right attacks to give investigators more time to question them.
A police statement released on Friday did not identify the suspects but described them as a 29-year-old woman and two men aged 36 and 24. The police said that they had also arrested a 41-year-old woman on suspicion of assisting an offender.
The four arrested are being held during the investigation into the break-in by Palestine Action at Brize Norton, Britain’s largest Royal Air Force base, in the early hours of June 20. The group posted footage online showing two activists moving around the base on electric scooters before using red paint to damage two military planes.
Palestine Action has previously targeted facilities linked to military companies, including Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer. The group also vandalized President Trump’s Turnberry golf resort in Scotland in March.
Mr. Trump referred to its members as “terrorists” and called for them to be “treated harshly” after activists defaced the resort’s clubhouse with red paint and daubed “Gaza is not 4 sale” on part of the golf course.
The British home secretary, Yvette Cooper, who is responsible for law enforcement and national security, said on Monday that Palestine Action would be deemed a terrorist group and banned. She said that its actions had put Britain’s national security at risk and met the legal definition of terrorism because those terms included “serious damage to property.”
Orders to ban groups under terrorism laws are usually passed without a vote in Parliament. But some lawmakers opposed to the ban are expected to debate the measure when it is formally introduced on Monday. There is a mechanism that would prompt a vote, but the Labour government’s large majority means that, even in that case, the order would be most likely pass.
The ban would make it a criminal offense to be a member of Palestine Action, to raise money for the group, to “invite support” or arrange meetings for it, to display its logo or to fail to disclose information about any banned activities to the police.
Palestine Action will be listed alongside more than 80 groups that Britain has barred as terrorist organizations, including Al Qaeda, Hamas and the Islamic State, as well as the Atomwaffen Division and other white supremacist groups.
Jonathan Hall, the British government’s adviser on terrorism legislation, said in an interview that to his knowledge, the Palestine Action ban would be the “first time that a group has been proscribed on the basis of serious damage to property” rather than for carrying out or supporting serious violence.
Rights groups and several left-wing British politicians have opposed the ban, and Palestine Action has threatened to sue. It called the ban “unhinged” and said it was “plainly preposterous” to list the group with terrorist organizations like the Islamic State. Palestine Action has raised about $220,000 in crowdfunding for legal action against the British government.
Both the arrest powers used on Thursday and the move to bar Palestine Action are based on the Terrorism Act 2000, which was introduced under a Labour government headed by Tony Blair.
It defines terrorism as the use or threat of action that involves serious violence against a person or endangers someone’s life, involves serious damage to property, creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public, or is intended to seriously disrupt or interfere with an electronic system.
Under the law, such threats or actions must be intended to influence the government or intimidate the public, and be “for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.”
When the legislation was originally being debated in Parliament, several lawmakers questioned whether the terrorist definition would include activists who targeted Royal Air Force bases, military planes and submarines to stop their use in what protesters viewed as war crimes.
A Home Office minister at the time, Charles Clarke, said that the government did not intend for it to apply to “direct action” or any “domestic, industrial or environmental action,” and the clause on damaging property was subsequently retained.
