This looks like a stitch-up to extricate Keir Starmer and his ministers from the mess they have made of British terrorism laws — all so they can continue conspiring in Israel’s genocide.
Protester being arrested in London on Sept. 6 for holding a sign saying “I support Palestine Action.” (Alisdaire Hickson, Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)
By Jonathan Cook
Jonathan-Cook.net
The High Court judge who granted a legal challenge to the government’s decision to proscribe Palestine Action — the first time in British history a civil-disobedience organisation has been declared a terrorist group, one now treated as on a par with Al-Qaeda — was removed at the last minute last week.
The judicial review hearing began without Justice Martin Chamberlain. He was replaced with a panel of three judges.
Justice Chamberlain did not suffer any timetabling conflicts. The Justice Ministry declined to offer any explanation for such a highly irregular change.
The outcome of the case will affect thousands of ordinary British citizens who have opposed the government’s anti-democratic proscription decision. They currently face jail sentences, and terrorism convictions, for holding placards saying: “I oppose genocide. I support Palestine Action.”
[Inside court last week lawyers for Palestine Action likened its tactics to early 20th century suffragettes. Final submissions in the appeal hearing and a secret “closed” hearing for national security reasons took place on Tuesday.]
Some oppose proscription because they believe civil disobedience of the kind used by Palestine Action, which targets arms factories supplying Israel with weapons used to slaughter Palestinian children, is the only effective way to put pressure on the government to stop colluding in the Gaza genocide.
Starmer’s government redefines “terrorism” to include for the first time civil disobedience and protest.
Then it declares it’s scrapping the ancient right to trial by jury (because juries too often acquit protesters).
In a rigged justice system, injustice is assured.
— Jonathan Cook (@Jonathan_K_Cook) November 25, 2025
Others hope to make the proscription unenforceable through mass defiance and thereby salvage one of the most fundamental democratic rights — the right to protest — from government assault.
Notably, this is not the first time Justice Chamberlain, who is noted for his independence, has been removed unexpectedly from a judicial review hearing in an Israel-related case.
Earlier this year, he was replaced by two other judges after he granted a legal challenge to the government’s continuing sale of parts for F-35 jets to Israel, despite the fighter plane’s use in the killing of many tens of thousands of civilians and the destruction of more than 80 percent of all buildings in Gaza.
Here is the panel of three judges who replaced Justice Chamberlain.
Dame Victoria Sharp is a from a family with extensive and close ties to the Conservative Party. She is the twin sister of Richard Sharp, who was appointed chair of the BBC Board by Boris Johnson, after Sharp had helped secured the former Tory prime minister a £800,000 loan.
Sharp was later forced to resign. Victoria Sharp is best known for jailing climate activists involved in peaceful protest and for forcing journalist Carole Cadwalladr to pay Brexit donor Aaron Banks £1 million in legal fees after he sued for libel.
Dame Karen Steyn was one of two judges who replaced Justice Chamberlain in the F-35 hearing. She and Justice Males ruled in Israel’s favour, even while accepting that Israel could use F-35s in Gaza in violation of international law.
Sir Jonathan Swift, meanwhile, has a long history of siding with the British state – for eight years he was the government’s top lawyer. In 2023 Swift rejected the appeal of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange against the British government’s approval of his extradition to the U.S. for exposing U.S. and U.K. war crimes. The U.S. wanted to lock him up indefinitely in a super-max prison.
A video has ignited questions over the impartiality of British policing after a man holding a placard reading “I oppose Palestine Action I support genocide” approached officers and asked why he was not being arrested despite police detaining people carrying Palestine Action signs pic.twitter.com/mMcdnXDwFE
— Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) November 29, 2025
Through class affiliation, upbringing, education and selection for temperament, senior judges invariably have a bias towards the interests of the British establishment. But some have a stronger bias than others.
It is not hard to understand why Chamberlain has been removed. His earlier rulings on Palestine Action’s proscription indicated that it might be difficult for him to rule in favour of the government.
It is also clear why he is being replaced by three new judges. Backing the government’s redefinition of terrorism — leading almost certainly to the jailing of former senior military personnel, barristers, doctors, priests, Holocaust survivors, and a former adviser to King Charles, all of whom who have publicly supported Palestine Action — risks looking like precisely what it is: a political decision in favour of lawlessness by the British state.
Having a ruling from a panel of three judges is a desperate attempt to create a veneer of judicial authority in support of the actions of an outlaw government.
It won’t work. This already looks like a self-evident stitch-up to extricate Sir Keir Starmer and his ministers from the mess they have made of British terrorism laws – all so they can continue conspiring in Israel’s genocide.
Jonathan Cook is an award-winning British journalist. He was based in Nazareth, Israel, for 20 years. He returned to the U.K. in 2021. He is the author of three books on the Israel-Palestine conflict: Blood and Religion: The Unmasking of the Jewish State (2006), Israel and the Clash of Civilisations: Iraq, Iran and the Plan to Remake the Middle East(2008) and Disappearing Palestine: Israel’s Experiments in Human Despair (2008). If you appreciate his articles, please consider offering your financial support.
This article is from the author’s blog, Jonathan Cook.net.
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
Well, you could say that the judge who was removed from the case was lucky.
James Earl Ray was tricked into confessing to the assassination of Martin Luther King. He later wrote to Judge Preston Battle to ask for a trial. But before he could give his ruling, Judge Battle very conveniently died of a heart attack!
According to a newspaper archive that I found on the internet:
“Friends said he had no history of heart trouble”
The newspaper report also states that Judge Battle had recently taken a week’s vacation and had a physical check up just before sentencing Ray. All of these events took place over just a few short weeks in 1969.
I hardly need to add that Ray did not get his trial.
When does the police union say enough is enough we are not putting our officer in a position of arresting people for doing the right thing. It will be interesting to hear what the Reform political party has to say which will give a true indication of where they stand on protecting the English people.
The “police union”! ?. The “PC” in I O P C stands for “police coverup”. They don’t get called “the filth” for no reason.
UK Justice = “This looks like a stitch-up”
Tell me something I didn’t know. And this is not new. The English, and the rest of the UK, have always run a system that is government by the elites, of the elites and for the elites. They concoct trappings of fake democracy and fake justice to cover up the very basic and obvious fact that the UK government and the UK courts always give the elites exactly what they want.
All of this has happened before, because this is the only way that “His Majesty’s Government” can possibly operate. His Majesty’s Government will always operate to the benefit of His Majesty and His Rich Friends. They do not call this a “People’s Government”, and in fact His Majesty’s Government has repeatedly fought long and bloody wars against any government that dares to call itself a People’s Government. His Majesty’s Government is never amused by the notion of the people ruling their own lives for their own best interests.
If you think any of this is new, read about how “His Majesty’s Government” treated any of the Irish who did not like the idea of bending the knee and kissing His Majesty’s Royal Ring.
100% agree.