• A landmark case regarding the right to support Palestinian resistance will be deliberated soon as the court hearing enters its last phase.
• Amidst a rapid crackdown on pro-Palestinian slogans and protests, Majid Freeman becomes a beacon of freedom of speech.
Activist and humanitarian aid worker Majid Freeman is due for deliberation in court this week with the last phase of his landmark case ending.
Freeman was charged with encouraging terrorism by inviting support for Hamas and expressing support on his social media posts and was arrested in July of last year.
Freeman has pled not guilty. The jury was set to make a decision soon amidst a widening crackdown on Palestinian sentiment across the country.
The allegations against Majid do not accuse him of committing a physical act of terrorism, nor operational involvement, nor even financial support; rather, the charges brought against him are directly to do with social media posts that could indicate sympathy and vocal support for Hamas and Palestinian resistance.
Anas Mustapha, Head of Public Advocacy at the international advocacy organization CAGE, said:
“Majid Freeman is a community activist, a humanitarian, and a man of conscience who refused to be silent about the genocide in Gaza.
He has been a target ever since his exposure of Leicester’s former failed Labour MP, Jonathan Ashworth, and his subsequent unflinching campaigning for the Palestinians in Gaza.”
“This is the security state seeking to discipline the entire Muslim community by targeting one of its most active voices for justice. To do so in defence of a genocide makes this prosecution all the more dubious and its motives entirely political.
“Regardless of the outcome, Majid has consistently upheld the truth: occupied people have the right and obligation to resist their occupiers.” Supporting that can never be a crime.”
Why could this trial be a landmark case?
Amidst a widening crackdown of Palestinian slogans like “globalize the intifada” and the outright call to ban protests by Prime Minister Keir Starmer, this court hearing could become a litmus test for free speech on Palestine and could send a clear signal to the Prime Minister and politicians that there is no real legal framework to ban pro-Palestinian slogans outright and any attempt to do so may be met with humiliation in court.
On top of that, the case will determine if voicing or showing agreement with the right to resist occupation can be prosecuted as terrorism in the UK. If Freeman is found guilty, it would mean UK courts conflict with international law, UN resolutions, and the Geneva conventions, all of which recognize the right of colonized and occupied peoples to resist.
