UK Appeal Court Clears Barrister in Palestine Action Contempt Case
A leading British human rights barrister who represented Palestine Action defendants has won an appeal against a contempt of court case brought against him in England. This British human rights barrister helped people who took action for Palestine. The Court of Appeal ruled on Monday, May 12, that Justice Johnson had wrongly initiated proceedings against Rajiv Menon KC, a King’s Counsel with three decades of experience, following his closing speech at Woolwich Crown Court. middleeasteyemiddleeasteye
Menon had been accused of breaching the presiding judge’s directions during the first trial involving six Palestine Action activists charged with causing criminal damage to weapons at an Israeli army factory outside Bristol. The people, from Palestine Action did this to the factory that belongs to the army. The proceedings against him were described as unprecedented in English legal history. middleeasteyemiddleeasteye
During the trial, Justice Johnson directed lawyers that their closing speeches could not invite the jury to disregard the court’s rulings or law, and barred them from reminding jurors of their right to acquit on conscience — a principle known as “jury equity.” middleeasteye
In his closing remarks, Menon read out an inscription on a plaque at the Old Bailey commemorating Bushell’s Case of 1670, which first established the right of juries to give their verdicts according to their convictions. He also told jurors that the defendants had been “restricted” when giving evidence about their knowledge of Israeli arms company Elbit Systems’ role in Israel’s war on Gaza, and that it would be “ridiculous” for jurors to ignore that wider context and its impact on the defendants. Menon further told the jury that the judge could not direct them to convict, according to The Times. middleeasteye + 2
Justice Johnson concluded that the effect of Menon’s speech “was to invite the jury to disregard my directions that they should put views of the Middle East and the war in Gaza, and emotion, to one side,” and referred Menon to the administrative court. middleeasteye
Menon’s legal team challenged the referral on a jurisdictional basis. His lawyers argued that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to handle the case without an intervention from the attorney general. middleeasteye
The Court of Appeal agreed. It found that Justice Johnson wrongly initiated proceedings and should have either dealt with the issue himself at the time or referred the matter to Attorney General Lord Hermer. middleeasteye
Menon’s solicitor, Jenny Wiltshire, from Hickman & Rose, said that Menon “is delighted that the Court of Appeal has found in his favour,” adding that he “hopes that this is now an end to the matter.” middleeasteye
The ruling draws a procedural boundary around how judges may escalate conduct complaints against barristers during politically sensitive trials. Legal observers had pointed to the case as a test of how far a trial judge’s authority extends over defence counsel’s courtroom speech — particularly in cases touching on foreign policy and armed conflict.
The case has been referred back to the trial judge. It will be halted unless Justice Johnson refers it to the attorney general. That referral is now the only viable path for the contempt proceedings to continue. middleeasteye
Background
Palestine Action is an activist group whose members have faced criminal trials in the UK over direct action targeting facilities linked to Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer. The six defendants in the first Woolwich Crown Court trial were charged with aggravated burglary in connection with damage caused at an Elbit-linked factory outside Bristol, and were ultimately cleared of those charges. They were subsequently retried, and four of the six were convicted of criminal damage last week, according to Middle East Eye. The contempt proceedings against Menon arose from his conduct during the first of those two trials. Menon, who has 30 years of experience, represented defendant Charlotte Head in both trials. middleeasteye + 3
Regional and Broader Impact
The Court of Appeal’s ruling does not address the substance of what Menon said — it decides only who has the authority to pursue the matter. That distinction carries weight. Barristers’ professional bodies had expressed concern that allowing trial judges to directly initiate contempt proceedings against defence counsel could have a chilling effect on courtroom advocacy, particularly in cases involving contested political contexts.
The Palestine Action prosecutions have attracted sustained attention in the UK, with supporters framing them as a test of civil liberties and the right to protest. Protesters have demonstrated outside the Royal Courts of Justice in support of campaigns against the ban on Palestine Action, with demonstrations as recently as November 2025, according to AFP. The broader legal trajectory of Palestine Action’s members — and the conditions attached to their trials — remains a live issue in British courts. middleeasteye
What Happens Next
The case now returns to Justice Johnson, who must either drop it or refer it to Attorney General Lord Hermer. This is a decision for Justice Johnson to make about the case. If the attorney general does not take up the referral, the contempt proceedings against Menon will end. Menon’s solicitor has indicated he considers the appeal ruling a basis for the matter to close entirely. No date for Justice Johnson’s next step has been publicly confirmed. middleeasteye
