Share this post:

Campaign group Defend Our Juries has reported that its website has been taken down, days before a major demonstration in London – in a move that raises serious questions about the UK Labour government’s attitude to protest and dissent.

The group has organised Saturday’s (August 9) protest against the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.

It is claiming the site was removed without warning after their web hosts were contacted over supposed breaches of terms and conditions.

No actual breach has been identified; Defend Our Juries spokespeople say they have verified this themselves.

What makes this questionable is the timing—and the content of the website that was taken offline.

The page reportedly contained legal and safety guidance for protestors, including advice on how to avoid violating the UK’s broad terrorism laws.

With the Metropolitan Police already threatening arrests under anti-terror legislation, and government spokespeople warning the public not to support Palestine Action, this legal information was of critical importance.

“Thousands of people are now blocked from legal information to ensure their legal rights are upheld,”

the group wrote on social media.

“This is incredibly irresponsible and is at the fault of the UK Government.”

They have since redirected protestors to www.wedonotcomply.org, a backup site now hosting the same legal resources.

But if the UK government really is behind the original site’s removal, does this mean Labour ministers are trying to push participants into criminalising themselves?

Democracy depends on the right to organise – and the right to know

You see, the implications of this takedown go well beyond web hosting policy.

The Terrorism Act 2000, under which Palestine Action has been proscribed, specifically allows for people to organise campaigns to reverse such decisions.

So it is entirely lawful to campaign for de-proscription—indeed, the courts are currently allowing a legal challenge against the ban to proceed.

Removing access to legal advice for protestors under these circumstances is not just irresponsible—it is potentially dangerous.

It undermines a core principle of the rule of law: that citizens must be able to know and understand their rights in order to exercise them safely.

A broader pattern: suppression of infrastructure, not just protest

This is not the first sign that this protest is being met with extraordinary resistance.

Earlier this week, I reported on the lobbying efforts of Lord Richard Dannatt, a former head of the British Army and current adviser to a US arms manufacturer targeted by Palestine Action.

Dannatt used his official House of Lords position to push for government action against the group—and this was followed by its proscription as a terrorist organisation.

With that background, the removal of a protest website—particularly one hosting legal information—does not look like a minor administrative action.

It looks like a continuation of a broader strategy: to eliminate not just the protest, but its ability to organise, coordinate, and defend itself legally.

Authoritarian tactics, democratic cost

In many authoritarian regimes, protest is not simply banned—it is de-legitimised through legal frameworks, while support networks are quietly dismantled under the guise of neutrality or procedure.

If that is what is happening here, the UK government is walking a very dangerous path.

Suppressing access to legal information—especially in the context of peaceful, if disruptive, protest—is a red flag for the health of democratic dissent.

Even if one disagrees with the aims or tactics of Palestine Action, or the protestors supporting them, the right to challenge the government and to access legal resources while doing so must be non-negotiable.

Otherwise, we are no longer talking about the rule of law.

We are discussing the rule of power.

Share this post: