- ‘We’re considering whether to appeal against this judgment, and also other ways that we can put pressure on the government,’ says Jennine Walker, a lawyer with the Global Legal Action Network
- ‘This court judgment makes it somewhat clearer that the UK government and Parliament need to act. So, absolutely, we will keep fighting,’ says Sacha Deshmukh, head of Amnesty International UK
LONDON
Several prominent rights organizations have vowed to keep up efforts to force the British government to halt arms exports to Israel after a top court dismissed their landmark appeal on the matter.
The UK High Court on Monday dismissed a judicial review brought by the Palestinian human rights organization Al-Haq, which sought to end the British government’s exports of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel amid its ongoing genocidal war on Gaza.
Doireann McCarthy, a legal researcher at Al-Haq, described the case as “monumental” despite the court’s dismissal.
“When it comes to the decision, of course, a definitive ruling on the grounds that we raised would have been desirable. So, in that sense, it’s a temporary setback,” she said.
“However, it has been really, really valuable in actually deferring it back to the government, meaning that ultimately, these issues need to be decided on.”
McCarthy confirmed that Al-Haq is actively considering an appeal.
“This is just the beginning. The fight for justice, self-determination, and the dignity of Palestinians is long, and we remain steadfast in this fight.”
Al-Haq’s case centered on Britain’s decision to exempt F-35 parts when suspending some arms export licenses last year, citing the UK’s legal obligations under international humanitarian law, including the Geneva Conventions, the Arms Trade Treaty, and the Genocide Convention.
Backed by Oxfam, Amnesty International UK, and Human Rights Watch, the case argued that the carve-out contravened these obligations, given the risk that F-35 components could be used in violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza.
However, judges Stephen Males and Karen Steyn ruled that the carve-out was lawful, and refused to grant permission for the case to proceed to a full hearing.
The court held that international treaties, including the Genocide Convention and the Arms Trade Treaty, do not form part of English law unless explicitly incorporated by Parliament. The judges also emphasized that foreign policy decisions remain within the executive’s remit.
“The conduct of international relations is a matter for the executive and not the courts,” the judges ruled, citing longstanding constitutional principles.
‘Deeply disappointed’
Jennine Walker, a lawyer with the Global Legal Action Network (GLAN), which supported Al-Haq’s case, said the organization remains committed to the case.
“We are deeply disappointed by the court’s decision to not uphold Al-Haq’s claim, but we will stand steadfast with them and continue the fight,” Walker told Anadolu.
“We’re considering whether to appeal against this judgment, and also other ways that we can put pressure on the government.”
Walker emphasized the significance of disclosures made during proceedings. “We’re able to disclose now the government’s assessments, the fact that they had plenty of evidence that what is happening in Palestine at the moment is a genocide, and the government deliberately chose not to see, not to recognize, and not to act,” she concluded.
Yasmine Ahmed, UK director of Human Rights Watch, termed the ruling “a sad day for international justice and accountability.”
“What we know is that the Palestinian people continue to (face) acts of genocide and other atrocities being carried out by Israel, and what the court has done … is given a green light for this UK government to continue to supply F-35 lethal components that are used by Israel in Gaza,” she said.
Ahmed stressed that the court’s decision does not alter realities on the ground. “This government is acting in violation of international law, its duty to prevent genocide, and its obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty,” she added.
She confirmed that Human Rights Watch, alongside Amnesty International, is considering further legal steps.
“This is not the end,” Ahmed stated. “The court judgment has invited Parliament to take action. So, it’s critical now that the representatives of the UK population take action and make sure that the government is transparent, clear, and held to account.”
‘Responsibility to keep fighting’
Sacha Deshmukh, head of Amnesty International UK, echoed these concerns, describing the situation in Gaza as “an ongoing genocide.”
“We at Amnesty are disappointed by (the) decision because the urgency of the crisis in Gaza means that we really all need to act now,” he said.
“What the court … said is that the responsibility to act rests with the UK government and with the UK Parliament. So, we are calling on the government and Parliament to now act straight away and stop UK arms exports, including F-35 parts, from going to Israel and contributing potentially to an ongoing genocide.”
Deshmukh said Amnesty would continue to campaign vigorously, stressing that “everyone around the world has a responsibility to keep fighting.”
“We certainly will carry on campaigning. In fact, this court judgment makes it somewhat clearer that the UK government and Parliament need to act. So, absolutely, we will keep fighting.”
