Hamas legal bid to be REMOVED from list of proscribed terrorist organisation.

[CrunchyKnees]

I mean tbh, I wouldn’t be even slightly surprised if they are successful. No wonder they tried this in the UK first.

Why haven’t these solicitors been arrested for acting on behalf of, and supporting, a proscribed terrorist organisation already? This is a crime in the UK.

Even after Hamas leaders admitted to the Oct 7th atrocities and said they’d do it again and again.

This is an actual ‘look at our cool team walking in slow motion down the street’ video from the law firm on the case:
https://x.com/riverwaylaw/status/1909951298885001553

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/apr/09/hamas-calls-on-the-uk-government-to-remove-it-from-list-of-banned-terrorist-groups

What is the MN consensus - Hamas are Freedom Fighters (seen this stated on here multiple occasions) or a terrorist organisation?

What the legal challenge is happening at protests is it? Are mumsnet users taking part in the legal challenge? If not then what's the reason for the posts 'I bet some mumsnet posters will be happy' and 'I never see anyone say anything against Hamas at protests so they must by default support them' nonsense posts then? There's plenty of threads dedicated to that shite talk too in case you missed them.

It’s a thread about a legal case re Hamas. I agree with pp if it’s not in your interest you don’t have to read it.

I hope it’s an impossibility as you seem to be suggesting, but I don’t know for certain.

Well the thread is about supporting Hamas and the legalities around it so I dont see why any of that is irrelevant.

Again, if you thibk this whole thread is pointless or are not interested in the topic you're welcome not to click on it.

I’m not sure I follow your logic.

I absolutely believe that Palestinians have the right to exist in their homeland, with dignity and security.
Hamas ( funded by Iran for its own malignant reasons) has made it very difficult for Israelis and Palestinians to come to an acceptable agreement.

Here's the witness statement for the legal action written by the hamas leader for those interested ...

ia801501.us.archive.org/17/items/witness-statements-lawsuit-ukv-h/Witness-statements-lawsuit-UKvH.pdf

Can't see the challenge succeeding at all - statement doesn't make a credible case for hamas being removed from the list ... does make out a good case for considering (re)adding zionists though ....

In terms of the law firm, there is a legal right under the terrorism act to apply for deproscription so to have legal representation in that process makes sense but they will be (and have been) very careful to say they are doing this pro bono to avoid issues with accepting money from a terrorist organisation, which they are prevented from doing. Any law firm agreeing to work for free on this will undoubtedly have sympathy with the person they are acting for, or why would you lose money on it, but they will be able to say they are supporting the legal process rather than supporting terrorism. Any one accused of terrorism under the act has a right to legal representation but it's very tricky due to conflicting interests between duties to client and public duties

“You’ve put a target on my back” – Hamas barrister attacks TV presenter

The barrister acting for terror group Hamas has accused a Talk TV presenter of putting a “target on my back” by associating him with his client.
At the same time, Franck Magennis’s set, Garden Court Chambers, has distanced itself from him.
In an interview on Talk TV, Mr Magennis responded to being asked ‘How do you sleep at night?’ by telling present Peter Cardwell what “what you’ve done is extremely dangerous and you shouldn’t have asked that question…
“You are trying to associate me with my client… I think you might be hearing from the police.”
He explained: “The low point of it on this side of the Irish Sea was Boris Johnson and Priti Patel using the phrase ‘activist lawyers’, they knew what they were doing, they were using it to stoke anti-migrant racism, and a man showed up with a knife at a law firm, calling by name for a solicitor that I know personally because they put a target on his back.
“The low point on the Irish side of the Irish Sea is Pat Finucane, of course. A British MP stood up in Parliament and said ‘He’s just like his client’. Pat Finucane represented members of the Provisional IRA, which is another proscribed organisation, and three week later was murdered in front of his family by Loyallist paramilitaries.”
In testy exchanges, Mr Magennis accused Mr Cardwell of “playing the same game – you’ve just put a target on my back”.
Mr Cardwell repeatedly asked the barrister why he had chosen to represent Hamas. Mr Magennis replied: “You’re trying to make me the story. If there are negative consequences, I’m holding you personally responsible.”
He went on to argue that “you don’t have to support a proscribed organisation to think it shouldn’t be proscribed”, adding: “It’s not about my belief. I’m a lawyer instructed to make some legal arguments, which is what I’ve done.”
Mr Magennis makes no secret of his pro-Palestinian views on social media, and his biography on the Garden Court Chambers website says: “He has expertise in legal claims connected to Palestinian emancipation from Israeli occupation.”
On the day of the 7 October attacks on Israel, he tweeted “Victory to the intifiada” and changed the photo on his X account to a bulldozer crashing through the border fence, although he has since replaced it.

www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/youve-put-a-target-on-my-back-hamas-barrister-attacks-tv-presenter

In a statement on its website, Garden Court Chambers said it was aware that “one of its members” had been “instructed to present an application to the Home Secretary, requesting that a proscribed organisation be de-proscribed”.

It went on: “All members of Garden Court Chambers are members of the independent Bar of England and Wales, are self-employed and are regulated by the Bar Standards Board. Professional conduct of members is not regulated by Garden Court Chambers.

“The barrister concerned has chosen to undertake this case in his individual capacity, and this in no way indicates that Garden Court Chambers supports his client.

“We take this opportunity as a chambers to make clear that we unequivocally condemn racism and antisemitism in all its forms.”

https://www.legalfutures.co.uk/latest-news/youve-put-a-target-on-my-back-hamas-barrister-attacks-tv-presenter

Can't see the challenge succeeding at all - statement doesn't make a credible case for hamas being removed from the list ... does make out a good case for considering (re)adding zionists though ....

You think supporting Israel's right to exist should be a crime?

Thanks for the link - will be interesting reading from the man in Qatar including

"I am submitting this application on behalf of Hamas for its deproscription from the British government’s list of proscribed terrorist groups. Despite the British state being the architect of our suffering through its collaboration with the Zionist project for over a century, I am inviting you to reverse that policy today.

1. We furthermore intend that the application will damage the standing and credibility of Zionism as an ideology, and the Zionists who still somehow openly identify with it. We hope that the current crisis of Zionism, substantially precipitated by the actions of Hamas’ military wing and other groups on 7th October 2023, can be transformed into a terminal crisis"

He does not exactly make a British reader or judge feel a warm glow of love from the writer for the British state.

It is very interesting "However, I have noticed from social media over the past 15 months that an increasing number of people living in Britain have become more sympathetic towards Hamas and our liberation struggle as a result of the brutal reality of Zionism being exposed through the first live-streamed genocide in history. This is reflective of the natural disposition of the British people towards justice: they are waking up to the myriad ways that they have been deliberately misled about Hamas for many years by politicians and the mainstream media. It is alarming that so many journalists, activists and students are being criminalised by the British state for simply expressing support for a movement that is protecting its people from genocide."

That is now how I feel. I support Israel which has a just cause.

Always read what your enemies write as it gives you insight.

I've read that last paragraph a few times and it sounds to me like they are saying the crisis of zionism justifies October 7th? Is this correct? It can't be, I must be reading it wrong? Can anyone translate into simple terms for me?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mousa_Abu_Marzook including " Like several other key Palestinian leaders and members of the islamist Hamas politburo,[34] Mousa Abu Marzouk became a billionaire. His total net worth is estimated at around $3 billion. This enormous personal wealth stands in stark contrast to the living conditions of many Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, where war trauma and poverty are widespread. The financial success of Abu Marzouk and other Hamas leaders has raised questions about the sources of their "blood-soaked" wealth and the use of international aid to the Palestinian people"

The US educated him etc and he lived there for 14 years and his US passport he agreed to give up as explained in the Wiki entry.

I think a better use of time would be to petition for the IDF to be added as a proscribed group. They act like terrorists so it should be successful.

So a theoretical timeline....
.prep. SA to start a genocide case against Israel,

declare war on Israel in a way that can't be ignored.

use social media to ramp up the rhetoric that it's genocide,

SA present their 'case' for genocide,

hamas (using their sympathisers) start a wedge case to pit UK state against UK hamas supporters. ( when they say Zionist entity eg Israel eg Jews they're carefully wording their own genocidal intent)

They were hoping 7/10 would be a call to arms for Arab nations, they were wrong. This is a call to arms for hamasniks in the UK because they're emboldened by what they've seen on our streets.
Persistent and divisive little buggers aren't they?

This is the barrister in the British chambers?

This language surprises me if so.

Exactly. I don't know if I've just got an extremely fuzzy head this morning but I can't quite parse it... either that or it's outright support for terrorism?

To me it sounds like according to them, the “crisis of Zionism” was caused by what Hamas and other groups did on October 7th, and that they hope that said crisis will become a terminal one i.e. lead to the end of Israel.
ETA: So basically as if they were saying: “Zionism is in a crisis right now and hopefully that will be the end of it.”

Hamas are clearly a terrorist org, and a horrific one. But it’s important that they can challenge their designation and that lawyers can represent them in doing so. I hope they lose.

Thanks,

So the current ' crisis of zionism ' ( otherwise known as the rise of antisemitism ) is due to the actions of 7 October and they hope this crisis will culminate in the end of the zionist entity?
Jesus. How is this even being heard?

At least 14 countries have backed SA’s claim Israel has committed genocide:

Belgium, Ireland, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Spain, Libya, Maldives, Mexico, Nicaragua, Jordan, Turkey

in addition to Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.

I agree @dairydebrisIt sounds to me an extension of what Hamas’ aims are.

I’m not surprised the Chambers has released a statement distancing themselves from the barrister. I am surprised we’re seeing that wording and application.

That's not what's being discussed here.

Some proper pillars of human rights there.