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?

OK, and do you go out and protest against Hamas?

This in spades. Even in the absence of Hamas, Palestinians still have the right to self-defense, to self-determination, to not be persecuted in their own homes, to not have their homes bulldozed because of illegal settlements. It’s not an either-or situation. Bibi Netyanhu is wanted for war crimes. Instead of making a mockery of the ICC, Bibi and his government are still answerable for their genocidal actions.

Exactly. Despite their faults, Hamas was willing to negotiate, Bibi and his government refused and decided to end the ceasefire instead. The Israeli government then perpetuated the same narrative and blamed Hamas.

I personally haven’t been to any of these marches (a big thing that made me reconsider at the time was the fact many Jewish people were expressing that it was making them feel intimidated – although I don’t think this was the intention of the overwhelming majority of marchers).

As far as I see, most marches on this have been pro- the Palestinian people above all.

People are very upset to see civilians being wiped out like ants, and with unbridled glee, and particularly at the scale we have seen.

I was very disturbed after 7th October to see certain people out showing open support for Hamas – I was horrified to see and read about the brutal, cruel attacks on innocent people and sickened and shocked that anyone could find any way to justify or find cause to celebrate any of those acts. So I can understand how hurtful it must be to see this type of vocal support for the most hateful of crimes.

Following Israel’s response, there has clearly been an uptick in antisemitism too. I’ve seen a lot of it on social media – comments under instagram posts, etc.

So it is understandable that many people feel threatened and, if they have ties with Israel, far less inclined to criticise Israel in this climate.

However I can also see many very legitimate reasons for criticism of Israel, and at this point Israel’s retaliatory actions have somewhat eclipsed the focus on Oct. 7th.

I think it’s also not difficult to understand why ordinary people are showing support for the Palestinian people.

Leaving aside the idiots who are sympathetic towards Hamas, it’s also not difficult to understand why the focus is not protest against Hamas.

Our political representatives show clear unambiguous support for Israel, a refusal to condemn despicable acts of destruction and injustice, and actively facilitate the supply of weapons as we watch atrocities unfold in Gaza. There is a clear lever to pull here in terms of domestic pressure from the electorate.

If aid to Palestinians is not getting to the right people this is also a problem. However in this scenario the intention of those funds is certainly to assist people in need and not to enrich Hamas. The government is not acting with the intent to fund Hamas and is not showing political support for Hamas.

Most surely, there is antisemitism, and there are antisemites who are emboldened by the current criticism of Israel.

But there are very legitimate reasons to express criticism of Israel that cannot and should not be hand waived away as antisemitism or deflected away with whataboutery about Hamas.

And I think many people are particularly unmoved by the ‘yeah but Hamas’ narrative and especially so since Israel’s own (rather pathetic) line has often been to deflect responsibility and accountability for its own indefensible actions away from themselves.

@findingnibbles unfortunately wars force people to take sides though many people can see the issue is nuanced with evil being done on both sides.

You say that people are unmoved by the “yeah but Hamas” narrative but I think what you mean is that people who are on the Palestinian side mock the very legitimate point made by people who have more sympathy with the Israel side that Hamas did launch an unprovoked attack on Israeli civilians killing about 1,200 people. And Hamas have pledged to kill all Jews in Gaza so they are a terrorist threat however you like to minimise their evil as “yeah but Hamas”.

Within the international community, most people are not unmoved by the way this war started or by the very real threat that Hamas pose to Israel. They absolutely believe it is relevant to the discussion. Which does explain why Netanyahu and the IDF have been allowed to do whatever it takes to weaken Hamas. And unfortunately the killings will continue ( & be allowed to continue by world leaders) until Hamas surrender or are destroyed. For the sake of the Palestinian civilians they should release the hostages & surrender before any more lives are lost.

This.

You say that people are unmoved by the “yeah but Hamas” narrative but I think what you mean is that people who are on the Palestinian side mock the very legitimate point made by people who have more sympathy with the Israel side that Hamas did launch an unprovoked attack on Israeli civilians killing about 1,200 people. And Hamas have pledged to kill all Jews in Gaza so they are a terrorist threat however you like to minimise their evil as “yeah but Hamas”.

No, that is not what I said at all, which I think is very clear in my post.

Just listening to Douglas Murray's new account of 7/10. I'm aware of his critics of course, but the content of his work stands ...
RPGs fired into an ambulance where 12 festival goers had hidden.
Gazan civilians looting festival goers cars and alerting gunmen if they found someone hiding...or lynching them themselves.
(The list of gleeful atrocities goes on.)
The celebrations in major cities at these acts of 'resistance' before the fighting had stopped were obscene.

That there are people subverting the values of our 'liberal democracies' to try and legitimise hamas and their ilk should have the same effect as a bucket of cold water on our group psyche.

@findingnibbles ^^I’m sick of you mocking the “yeah but Hamas” narrative as you put it and disgusted by your statement that “people are particularly unmoved” by it - speak for yourself! People should not be unmoved by mention of the Hamas attack that started the war on October 7th 2023. It killed 1,195 people, most of them civilians and including children.

That isn’t what I was referring to, which was explicitly clear in my post – I actually mentioned that I was very moved indeed by Oct 7th. I can only assume that you are purposely pretending to misunderstand and aren’t really interested at all in what I’ve said.

Maybe just quit mentioning "yeah but Hamas" ...?

It doesn't give the impression of you being very moved by the event people are talking about when they say Hamas started the war.

I’m referring to the unwavering blind deflection by some people whenever faced with any criticism of Israel. Israel can take responsibility for its own actions (or at least should be able to, but doesn’t). If you cannot accept criticism of Israel you are simply biased and no reasoning or evidence will change that.

I was very critical indeed of Hamas in the post you are responding to.

The reason the US offers so much support to Israel is largely strategic – the relationship buys them concrete and influence in the region. The UK likewise, in addition to being heavily dependent on the US. It is driven by geopolitical self-interest. This emboldens Israel to act with impunity.

There is not "blind deflection" to "any criticism of Israel" @findingnibbles you just feel like there is because it angers you when anyone points out anything from Israel's point of view.

Lots of pro Israel people on here have also expressed disgust or sorrow at certain actions of the IDF - I have done so on more than one occasion. But I also believe that the Hamas attack on October 7th is what triggered the whole mess. I should be allowed to express my opinion on that without it being mocked as a deflection "oh but Hamas" - it's a relevant point.

I also don't agree with your analysis that other countries stay out of stopping Netanyahu purely based on geopolitical self-interest, though it is a factor. I think that while most countries are appalled by the civilian casualties in Gaza and believe Israel should restore humanitarian aid, it is undeniable that Hamas have to be stopped. As was said in a joint statement between the UK, France and Germany issued in March 2025, We are clear that Hamas must neither govern Gaza nor be a threat to Israel anymore.

The report called on "all parties to re-engage with negotiations to ensure the ceasefire is implemented in full and becomes permanent. This must include Hamas releasing the hostages that they have cruelly detained and persistently refuse to release".

www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-from-the-foreign-ministers-of-france-germany-and-the-uk-e3-on-gaza

I think it’s ridiculous to make the sweeping blanket statement that “there is not blind deflection to any criticism of Israel” that you have made. That’s a very bold universal rule that you’ve claimed is in operation. Besides the fact we’ve all seen it, many times, it once again shows clear, simple bias that you’ve claimed this never happens, ever.

”I should be allowed to express my opinion without it being mocked as “oh but Hamas””

We have not had any interaction where this has happened.

“I also don’t agree with your analysis that other countries stay out of stopping Netanyahu purely based on geopolitical self-interest, though it is a factor”.

We are in agreement. I said US support is largely strategic, not that it’s the only factor.

I have referenced October 7th in previous posts and you & others mock people who mention “yeah but Hamas” (in your words) so you have effectively mocked my opinion and that of other people too.

What I clearly meant was there is not blind deflection of every criticism of Israel but was quoting you who used the term “any criticism of Israel”.

Switzerland to enact Hamas ban from May 15

While we have lawyers in the UK acting on behalf of Hamas, it's good to remember most people in the West see them for the terrorists they are. Even the most neutral of countries - Switzerland - has taken a stand against them.

From an article in Reuters today:

A new Swiss law banning Hamas and related organisations will come into force on May 15, the government said on Wednesday, aiming to prevent the Palestinian militant group from using Switzerland as a safe haven by making entry bans or expulsions easier to arrange.
The law, which was approved by parliament last December and came in the wake of Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023, gives Swiss authorities "the necessary tools to take action against Hamas activities or support for the organisation in Switzerland," the government said.
The Gaza war started after Hamas' attack which killed 1,200 people and resulted in 251 hostages being taken to Gaza, according to Israeli tallies. Since then, Israel's offensive on the enclave has killed more than 52,000, according to local Palestinian health officials.
The Swiss law enables preventive police measures such as entry bans or expulsions, and also makes it more difficult for Hamas to use Switzerland as a financial hub for its activities.

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/switzerland-enact-hamas-ban-may-15-2025-04-30/

What does banning Hamas mean for neutral Switzerland?

Until now, Switzerland has deliberately exercised restraint in banning terrorist organisations, preferring to keep its doors open. “We talk to everyone” is the slogan of Swiss diplomacy.

This also applied to Hamas. Switzerland maintained a discreet but at times intensive dialogue with Hamas for decades, until just a few years ago. “Switzerland uses its contacts with Hamas in Gaza to urge them to comply with international humanitarian law” – this was how the government explained its policy in 2017, when the call to ban Hamas first emerged in the Swiss parliament.

Even then, the government emphasised the importance of good offices in its foreign policy. It also justified its so-called contact policy with Hamas by saying Switzerland’s engagement “is aimed at preventing violent extremism”.

This didn’t work. In 2023 Hamas committed the terrorist attacks of October 7 in Israel, the worst pogrom against Jews since the Holocaust. Hamas members killed 1,200 people and abducted 250. It said such attacks would be repeated until Israel was destroyed.

After that, dialogue was over – also for Switzerland. Under pressure from parliament, the government imposed a ban on Hamas. Parliament has now sealed this law.

https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/swiss-politics/what-does-banning-hamas-mean-for-neutral-switzerland/88576175

The scumbag of a lawyer was posting on twitter on 7/10/2023 defending the attacks. There's not much I agree with Ribert Jenrick on but he definitely should be disbarred.

Let us hope the legal action does not succeed. Hamas should remain on the banned list.

Home Office dismisses UK lawyers’ bid to overturn Hamas’ proscription

The Home Office has rejected a bid by a UK law firm to have Hamas removed from the UK’s list of proscribed terrorist organisations.

The now-defunct Riverway Law launched a legal challenge in April on behalf of the group, claiming the designation is a breach of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).

Following the Home Office’s dismissal, Riverway Law and Hamas can appeal the decision, but de-proscription is rare, with only four groups having been taken off the list since it was introduced under the Terrorism Act 2000.

www.thejc.com/news/uk/home-office-dismisses-bid-overturn-hamas-proscription-djcqqx11

Apparently they're rebranding as riverway to the sea...

Yup ... Riverway Law has closed down in its current form after being investigated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority.

The SRA is understood to have opened its investigation into the firm in May and was still at an early phase last month. But Riverway Law ceased trading on June 29 and no longer functions as a solicitors’ practice regulated by the SRA.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/07/05/british-law-firm-hamas-changes-name-riverway-to-sea/

Good. Absolutely ridiculous case.

Good

Is it just me or are those lawyers really concerning?

I think Hamas are a terrorist group, but also more than that as they torture Palestinians and stuff.