Five activists affiliated with Palestine Action face the prospect of being sentenced under terrorism legislation following their conviction for property damage during a protest at a Barclays Bank branch in Burnley, Lancashire, last August. The group targeted the bank due to its financial investments in Elbit Systems, an Israeli weapons manufacturer.

Brendon O’Hagan, 28; Amanda Kelly, 31; Humeera Atiqnisar, 31; Mohammed Malik, 28; and Alma Yaniv, 70, were found guilty of causing approximately £212,000 worth of damage after breaking windows and throwing red paint at the bank. The court was not initially informed of any potential terrorist links related to their actions during the trial.

However, following the verdicts, Judge Philip Parry indicated he would consider whether the offences had a "terrorist connection." This move follows a precedent set last month when four other Palestine Action activists were convicted for damaging property during a raid on Elbit Systems' factory near Bristol. In that case, Mr Justice Johnson ruled post-conviction that their conduct carried a terrorist connection. Judge Parry cited Johnson’s judgment when seeking legal submissions on the possible terrorism link in the Barclays case.

Mohammed Malik expressed concern over the application of counter-terrorism laws, stating that prosecuting activists as terrorists for acts involving paint and broken windows "far beyond the charges before the court" raises critical questions about the use of anti-terrorism legislation against political protest. Malik warned that the decision sets a dangerous precedent.

Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, characterized the case as a continuation of a troubling trend following Johnson’s earlier ruling. She suggested that this represents a broadening of the interpretation of terrorism laws against political activism.

The protest occurred prior to Palestine Action’s designation as a terrorist organization by the UK government, and at the time, officials including the home secretary did not classify the incident as terrorism. Despite this, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is reportedly arguing that the defendants’ own trial testimonies, which confirmed their involvement with Palestine Action and connected the protest to a wider campaign against Barclays, reveal a terrorist link warranting sentencing under terrorism statutes. This argument was not presented before or during the trial.

Human rights advocate Akiko Hart, director of Liberty, criticized the case as highlighting significant flaws in the UK’s counter-terrorism legislation, which she said ensnares activities unlikely to be widely regarded as terrorism.

Speaking in political terms, Labour MP and former shadow chancellor John McDonnell condemned the potential terrorism sentencing as unjust, asserting that it appears designed to suppress dissent against the conflict in Gaza.

Sentencing for the Burnley case is scheduled for September 4. Both the CPS and the judiciary declined to comment further.