The United Kingdom's Court of Appeal has overturned a previous High Court ruling, determining that the government's designation of the activist group Palestine Action as a terrorist organization was lawful.

英國上訴法院推翻了先前高等法院的裁決，判定政府將激進組織 Palestine Action 定義為恐怖組織是合法的。

The appellate ruling, delivered by a five-judge panel led by Lady Chief Justice Sue Carr, concluded that the proscription of Palestine Action was a proportionate response to the group's activities. The court rejected the characterization of the organization as a non-violent civil disobedience movement, asserting instead that it operates as a covert entity utilizing secret cells to execute property destruction and cause physical injury. This judicial determination follows a February High Court decision which had deemed the ban unlawful; however, the appellate panel found that the lower court had underestimated the Home Secretary's institutional latitude and misapplied proportionality assessments regarding future risk.

這次上訴裁決由首席法官 Sue Carr 領導的五名法官小組作出，結論是將 Palestine Action 列為禁制組織，是對該組織活動的適度回應。法院拒絕將該組織定格為非暴力公民抗命運動，反而主張其作為一個秘密實體，利用秘密細胞來執行財產破壞並造成身體傷害。此次司法判定是在二月高等法院判定禁令非法之後做出的；然而，上訴小組發現原審法院低估了內政大臣的體制裁量權，且在關於未來風險的比例適當性評估上有所誤判。

Historically, the group has targeted entities associated with the manufacture of weaponry for Israel, including Elbit Systems, Thales, and Leonardo. Specific incidents cited include the 2025 breach of the Royal Air Force base at Brize Norton and various raids on industrial facilities resulting in millions of pounds in criminal damage. The severity of these actions was underscored by a separate judicial proceeding in which four activists received custodial sentences ranging from four to nearly eight years, with the presiding judge establishing a 'terrorist connection' to their offenses.

在歷史上，該組織一直將目標對準與以色列武器製造相關的實體，包括 Elbit Systems、Thales 和 Leonardo。被引用的具體事件包括 2025 年闖入 Brize Norton 皇家空軍基地，以及對多處工業設施進行襲擊，導致數百萬英鎊的刑事損毀。這些行動的嚴重性在另一項司法程序中得到強調，當時四名激進分子被判處四至近八年不等的監禁，主審法官認定其罪行與「恐怖主義相關」。

Stakeholder reactions to the verdict are polarized. The Metropolitan Police and the Home Office have affirmed the legality of the ban, which renders membership or support for the group a criminal offense punishable by up to 14 years of imprisonment. Conversely, human rights organizations, including Amnesty International and Liberty, have characterized the ruling as a disproportionate expansion of counter-terrorism powers that threatens fundamental rights to assembly and expression. This sentiment is echoed by the group's co-founder, Huda Ammori, who has indicated an intention to seek further recourse through the UK Supreme Court and the European Court of Human Rights.

利益相關者對裁決的反應兩極分化。倫敦警察廳與內政部肯定了禁令的合法性，該禁令使加入或支持該組織成為刑事犯罪，最高可被判處 14 年監禁。相反，包括國際特赦組織與 Liberty 在內的人權組織將此次裁決描述為反恐權力的不相稱擴張，威脅到集會與表達的基本權利。該組織共同創辦人 Huda Ammori 亦呼應此觀點，並表示打算向英國最高法院及歐洲人權法院尋求進一步救濟。

The proscription remains in effect, and legal proceedings for thousands of individuals arrested for supporting the group are pending further judicial review.

禁令依然有效，而那些因為支持該組織而被捕的數千人，其法律程序正等待進一步的司法覆核。