Five Palestine Action activists convicted of breaking windows and throwing red paint at a Barclays Bank branch in Burnley, Lancashire, now face the possibility of being sentenced as terrorists, after a judge signaled he would consider a terrorist connection to their offending. Brendon O'Hagan (28), Amanda Kelly (31), Humeera Atiqnisar (31), Mohammed Malik (28), and Alma Yaniv (70) were found guilty of causing £212,000 in damage during a direct action protest in August 2024. They targeted the Barclays branch because it held shares in Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons firm. The Guardian

After the verdicts, Judge Philip Parry told both prosecution and defence that he intended to consider whether a terrorist connection applied to the offending. This came as a surprise: neither the jury nor the defendants had been previously informed that a terrorist connection was on the table. Judge Parry referenced a judgment from Mr Justice Johnson when asking lawyers for submissions on the question. The Guardian

That judgment originates from a separate case involving four other Palestine Action activists who raided Elbit's Filton factory near Bristol. Those four became the first defendants convicted of property damage whose offending was deemed, after conviction, to have a terrorist connection. They received lengthy prison sentences and will be subject to 15 years of terrorist notification requirements, meaning they must regularly register personal details with police, similar to the requirements placed on individuals convicted of terrorism offences. The Guardian

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which handles criminal prosecutions in England and Wales, argued that the Barclays five should be sentenced as terrorists, even though prosecutors did not raise that possibility before or during the trial. The CPS contends the terrorist connection only became apparent from admissions the defendants made during the trial, including their affiliation with Palestine Action and that the protest was part of a broader campaign against Barclays. The Guardian

The Burnley protest took place before Palestine Action was banned as a terrorist group. At the time, the protest was not assessed by the home secretary or government officials as a terrorism incident. Palestine Action was subsequently banned as a terrorist organisation effective July 4, 2025, after a legal challenge to the ban failed. The Guardian

The case has drawn sharp criticism from civil liberties advocates and politicians. Akiko Hart, director of Liberty, a UK civil liberties organisation, said the case exposed "the deep flaws in the UK's counter-terror laws which capture activity most people would never consider terrorism." Labour MP and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell said trying direct-action protesters under ordinary criminal law but then sentencing them under terrorist legislation "cannot be seen in any way as fair or just" and appears "specifically targeted to silence the voices of people speaking out against the genocide in Gaza." The Guardian

A key point of comparison involves how similar offences by other activist groups have been treated. Seven Extinction Rebellion protesters received suspended sentences for causing more than £100,000 in damage by breaking windows at Barclays' London headquarters in 2023. Comparable climate activist offending has not been deemed to have a terrorist connection. The Guardian

Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori said the Barclays case was an example of "the floodgates flowing" from Justice Johnson's earlier terrorist-connection ruling. The Guardian

The broader context here is the expanding reach of UK counter-terrorism sentencing. Applying terrorist connection findings to property damage committed before the group was banned extends the legal framework governing direct action protests in a new direction. The gap in prosecutorial approach between Palestine Action activists and climate protesters who committed comparable criminal damage raises substantive questions about the consistency of terrorism designations. The post-conviction introduction of terrorist connection considerations, occurring only after a jury verdict and without prior notice to defendants, introduces a structural shift in how terrorism sentencing enhancements are applied. The use of admissions made during trial to establish a terrorist connection retroactively places defendants in a position where their own testimony becomes the evidentiary basis for a sentencing enhancement they could not have anticipated. The 15-year terrorist notification requirement attached to the Filton sentences gives a concrete measure of the long-term consequences flowing from these designations. The CPS argument that affiliation with Palestine Action and participation in a broader campaign suffices to establish a terrorist connection, combined with the group's subsequent ban, suggests that organisational membership is being weighed as a determining factor in sentencing classifications for actions that were not originally treated as terrorism incidents.