CAAT: Solidarity with the Barclays 5! Direct Action is not terrorism!

Read the statement online here

The weaponisation of terror legislation against the Filton 4 has established a deeply repressive precedent within the British criminal justice system. This was, of course, always its aim. While Judge Johnson gained a promotion following the sentencing, Fatema Zainab, Sam, Ellie and Lottie face collectively over 25 years in prison – for the crime of seeking to save lives.

Now, less than two months later, the same draconian tactics are being wielded against another group of actionists: The Barclays 5, who are imminently at risk of terrorism sentencing.

Brendan O’Hagan, Amanda Kelly, Hmeera Atiqnisar, Mohammed Malik, and Alma Yaniv took direct action against a Barclays branch in Burnley, Lancashire in August 2024. They sprayed the bank with red paint to symbolise Palestinian blood, blood that has been shed due to British banks like Barclays financing Israel’s genocide of Gaza. They broke bank windows to cost Barclays more than what it was gaining from its investments in Elbit Systems.

A genocide is only as strong as its financiers, and Barclays at the time was the “financial artery” of Elbit Systems. Following a wave of direct action in 2024 targeting Barclays branches across the country, including the Barclays 5 action, Barclays pulled its share investments from Elbit Systems. This evidence speaks for itself: direct action is one of the most effective tactics activists have to stop Israel’s genocide of Gaza.

Barclays has since quietly rolled back its financing of Israeli bonds, but continues to provide over £8 billion in investments and loans to companies other than Elbit which are arming Israel’s settler colonialism and genocide. Barclays also was the official “strategic partner” of Farnborough International Airshow, an arms fair akin to DSEI that welcomed over a thousand arms trade aligned corporations to Hampshire last month. Huge numbers across the country have joined the campaign to Boycott Barclays, demonstrating the strength of a movement utilising a diversity of tactics.

The Barclays 5 were convicted of criminal damage to the value of roughly £200 000 at Preston Crown Court in June 2026, once again in a court where the prosecution did not disclose any potential terror connection to the jury. The defendants themselves were also kept in the dark about it.

During the trial, the jury heard the motivation behind the Barclays 5 action, as they acted like the Filton 25 and so many others, to save Palestinian lives. After this evidence was given, the presiding judge, Justice Philip Parry, struck all of it out. He told the jury that the defendants had no lawful excuse for their action.

During deliberations, jurors asked whether they were allowed to use their democratic rights and vote with their consciences. They were told no, and that they could only follow legal directions from Judge Parry, which could only lead to one verdict: guilty.

Judge Parry explicitly referenced Judge Johnson’s sentencing of the Filton 4 when, after the trial, he informed the defendants’ barristers that he would be assessing whether to apply terrorism connections in sentencing, under section 69 of the Sentencing Act 2020. Judge Johnson’s ruling will likely be used to target more actionists, but the movement for Palestine across the country will continue to show up in resolute solidarity with activists facing bogus terror charges.

Judge Johnson has not stopped at his ruthless sentencing of the Filton 4, as although the trial has been temporarily stayed, he continues with his efforts to prosecute barrister Rajiv Menon KC, who defended Lottie Head, with passion and truth, during the Filton trial. Please support Netpol’s call to stop this oppressive manoeuvre.

The Barclays 5 need all of our solidarity. Please keep watch for updates on court support needs for these activists by following Prisoners for Palestine. Please also support the fundraiser for the Barclays 5.

As so many principled activists across the country have made clear, no amount of pro-genocide state repression will stop people taking direct action for Palestine. In fact, the lengths our government and legal system are going to try to halt this tactic has functioned to demonstrate its strength.

If direct action posed no threat to weapons companies and their financial backers’ violent aims, then we would not be seeing such terror tactics targeting activists from our ostensibly “neutral” judicio-legal structures, under a government which as we know, is not neutral at all.