In a move that has sparked widespread controversy, four UK-based activists were sentenced as terrorists for their role in damaging military drones and equipment at an Elbit Systems UK factory in 2026. Elbit, Israel’s largest arms manufacturer, has been a significant supplier of drones used in the israeli military’s operations in Gaza. The sentencing, handed down by Justice Jeremy Johnson, marks a troubling precedent in British legal history.
The activists, affiliated with the Palestine Action network, were part of the so-called Filton 25 arrested in relation to the Elbit factory incident. They have been in detention for over two years and now face an additional five years in prison for criminal damage with a terrorist connection. One defendant received an extra three years for striking a police officer during the incident.
The First of Its Kind: Terrorism Enhancements for Criminal Damage
This case is the first in Britain where individuals have faced terrorism enhancements at sentencing without being convicted of terrorist offenses. It is also the first instance where criminal damage convictions have been classified as terrorism. The defendants were not permitted to present their motivations, such as the desire to save Palestinian lives or prevent mass slaughter, to the jury. Justice Johnson set strict restrictions, prohibiting any mention of the genocide in Gaza or Elbit’s role in it.
The activists were previously cleared of more serious charges, including aggravated burglary and violent disorder. Despite this, they will now be subject to at least 15 years of terrorist notification requirements, including informing the police of personal and financial details and travel plans.
A Stark Contrast: Sentencing Disparities in the UK
The sentencing of the Palestine Action activists highlights a stark contrast in how different types of offenses are treated in the UK. For instance, individuals convicted of participating in brutal white supremacist riots across the UK in 2026, 2026, and recent weeks in Belfast, Northern Ireland, have received significantly lighter sentences. These riots involved setting migrant shelters on fire and beating Black and brown people in the streets.
A 30-year-old man who kicked and punched a Black man in the face amid an anti-immigrant race riot in Manchester in 2026 was sentenced to three years in jail. While labeled a violent racist by the presiding judge, he was not labeled a terrorist, nor were any of his fellow pogromists. This disparity raises questions about the ideological priorities of the authorities applying the terror label.
The Broader Context: Palestine Action and Authoritarian Crackdowns
Palestine Action, a loose-knit network of Palestine-solidarity direct-action advocates, has faced extraordinary authoritarian crackdowns in the UK. The group was proscribed under the Terrorism Act, rendering any support for it a criminal offense. Nearly 3,000 people have been arrested for simply holding signs at rallies and sit-ins that bear slogans like “I support Palestine Action”. A British High Court ruled the government’s proscription of the group unlawful in February, but the ban remains in place as the government appeals the decision.
Over 100 people, many of them elderly retirees, were arrested on the day of the sentencing hearing while holding signs in support of Palestine Action. The treatment of violent anti-immigrant racists in the UK provides a telling point of comparison. Justice Johnson, who sentenced the Palestine Action defendants as terrorists, moved last year to release the UK’s leading far-right provocateur, Tommy Robinson, early from prison. Robinson had been convicted for contempt of court after continuously violating injunctions on spreading false allegations against a Syrian refugee.
The actions taken to disable Elbit equipment were specifically not acts of political persuasion. They were not petitions, rallies, or economic pressure campaigns. The very point of direct action is to interfere with a given site of production and circulation of materials. A broken quadcopter drone cannot rain fire down on the bodies of Palestinian civilians or flay the flesh of Palestinian toddlers.
If terrorismper Johnson, refers to criminal acts with the aim of ideological or political persuasion, we might consider this: Following escalations in Britain’s white riots against immigrants, the government has moved to further harden its border regime and shutter many asylum hotels that had become focal points for racist protests. By the lights of the British government, this does not constitute yielding to white supremacist terror, though. The label terrorism is reserved for other targets.
