Jewish anti-genocide activist Jenny Manson has been at the (feared to be rigged) judicial review of the Starmer regime’s Israel-driven decision to ban non-violent anti-genocide protest group Palestine Action. The review is currently underway at the High Court. She has attended as a witness in the case brought jointly by PA co-founder Huda Ammori, the United Nations’ top human rights expert and human rights groups Amnesty International and Liberty, though there will be no cross-examination.
After checking with her lawyers, Ms Manson has released her full witness statement exclusively to Skwawkbox and the Canary. The statement speaks on her behalf and on behalf of left-wing Jewish group Jewish Voice for Liberation. It tells the court that the government should be banning genocide, not Palestine Action, and that it should not be prioritising or even listening to the demands of Israeli arms companies and pro-Israel groups. They present themselves as representative of British Jews, but speak “not in our name”.
The statement, in full, is below:
JENNY MANSON FIRST WITNESS STATEMENT
I, JENNY MANSON, of Jewish Voice for Liberation (“JVL”) of [redacted] will say as follows:
1. I am a co-chair of JVL, registered at the above address.
2. This statement has been drawn from my own knowledge and from information and records of JVL.
Where external sources have been relied on, these are identified in the statement.
About JVL
3. JVL, formerly Jewish Voice for Labour, was conceived of as a broad-based organisation open to all Jewish members of the Labour Party. Founded in 2017, the group would act as a network for progressive Labour Jews united in opposing all forms of racism. It would also be a home within the party for Jews who did not feel represented by the Jewish Labour Movement, who were opposed to the Israeli lobby and were critical of the use of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (“IHRA”)’ s ‘working definition’ of antisemitism.
4. Members who had been active in a number of organisations were involved: Jewish Socialists’ Group, Jews for Justice for Palestinians (JFJFP), Independent Jewish Voices, Jewish Cultural and Anti-Racist Project, Jewish Music Institute, Friends of Yiddish, Kehillah North London etc.
5. JVL was incorporated with a strong set of values, including opposition to discrimination against any and all people. Our statement of principles provides that “[w]e stand for rights and justice for Jewish people everywhere, and against wrongs and injustice to Palestinians and oppressed peoples anywhere. Our political priorities are universal human rights and dignity, justice for all, and freedom of expression.”
6. JVL advocates for anti-racist, anti-discriminatory and pro-justice causes. Support for the rights of refugees has been a significant part of our advocacy. Jewish people have been refugees ourselves; identification with refugees and a deep-felt humanitarianism to help them has been an important part of my own membership and that of many others.
7. At the time of writing, JVL has just over 1,000 paying members. This includes 350 full members (those who identify as Jewish) and over 650 solidarity members. JVL is a Jewish-led organisation and therefore all constitutional amendments are voted on by full members only. An elected executive committee of full (Jewish) members make the day-to-day decisions and delegate tasks to subgroups including the Website team and Education group. Members of the Executive are elected by all members at the annual general meeting.
8. JVL has two formally constituted local JVL groups, one in Greater Manchester and one in Nottingham and a very active Education group.
9. JVL has a significant presence online and on social media. The JVL website posts around 400-500 items a year, helping to inform members and others in the movement with news and articles relating to JVL’s activism. Throughout 2024, there were 47,000 unique visitors each month, with a total of 3.7 million page views for that year. JVL enjoys 26k followers on Twitter/X and around 15k on both Face book and TikTok. JVL has produced a number of videos, including the ‘Just Jews’ series, which featured prominent national figures such as Alexei Sayle, as well as footage from protests and demonstrations, such as a recording of the holocaust survivor Stephen Kapos’s moving speech at the Palestine demonstrations in central London. This video has received over 2.2 million views.
10. JVL is pleased to be part of a growing movement in the UK and throughout the world of Jewish people standing up against the genocide in Gaza and in support of Palestinian human rights. New Jewish groups are appearing in all areas as more and more have felt compelled to stand up and be counted. We know that our own members are involved in groups in Cambridge, Hastings, Leeds, Leicester and Sheffield and are in contact with a group in Brighton. Furthermore, there is a group in Manchester with a membership wider than our own Greater Manchester branch.
11. The Jewish Bloc came into existence in November 2023 in the context of the massive marches in solidarity with the Palestinians that erupted in reaction to Israel’s assault on the Gaza strip. The general revulsion against the mass slaughter, war crimes and ethnic cleansing was felt with particular intensity by many Jews. Members of several Jewish groups encountered each other on early marches and decided it would be good to march together. These groups range from well established and relatively large groups, such as JVL , through to smaller groups, some of whom were newly established in response to the emergency. The Bloc has always been of several hundreds, and sometimes more than a thousand, strong.
12. In stages a coordinating group was established to set up basic arrangements – rendezvous time and place, stewarding, purchase of tabards, etc. From the outset, JVL members have been active in the coordinating group. Our pre-existing links have been useful for example, in establishing a channel of communication with the Palestinian Solidarity Campaign (PSC), meaning that the Bloc could nominate a representative platform speaker at each march. A distinctive banner was obtained that stretches the width of the March column, funded by the groups within the Bloc that could afford it. The Bloc has been met with warmth and affection from other marchers.
JVL on Proscription of Palestine Action
13. After hearing the reporting of the decision to proscribe Palestine Action, a number of officers noted their individual concerns. There were discussions about various JVL responses and the risks of certain language expressing opposition to the proscription or support for Palestine Action’s aims. We also reached out to other Jewish groups and individuals and asked for their perspective of the Home Secretary’s decision.
14. We received a lot of interest in response. Many wanted to take an active stance, but several people voiced their concern as to repercussions and risks that could arise from questioning the proscription or any inference of showing support for a newly proscribed group.
15. One initiative gained a lot of support. We decided on a letter that individuals could sign that would voice our concerns about the decision to the Prime Minister and Home Secretary.
16. On the 5th August 2025, opposite Downing Street, hundreds of our members and supporters gathered in a rally to show collective support when we attempted to deliver the letter. Our clear message, ‘Proscribe Genocide not Protest’, was reiterated m signs, alongside demands for immediate government action.
17. The letter was signed by over 300 Jewish individuals and groups including Sir Geoffrey Bindman, Mike Leigh, Prof Jacqueline Rose, Michael Rosen, Alexei Sayle and Gillian Slovo. I exhibit an updated version of the letter as JM/01. Miriam Margolyes signed this reminder letter.
18. On the 5 September 2025, we received a response, not from the Prime Minister or Home Secretary, but from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO). The response was a blanket statement on policy towards Israel/Palestine and on the proscription. It was not tailored to us or written with consideration of our concerns. I exhibit the letter in response as JM/02.
19. The government’s lack of consideration or response to our concerns is stark and, we would say, illustrative of their response to critical representations in this debate, including many from us in the Jewish community. I am disappointed to say that it is what I expected.
Consultation
20. I am not aware of any Jewish groups who the government consulted on the decision to proscribe Palestine Action but understand that two groups, which lobby in support of the Israeli state and who were vocally in support of the proscription, have since claimed “victory”. The Campaign Against Antisemitism and ‘We Believe in Israel’ both produced materials in support of proscription and have stated they have corresponded with the government in support of this decision and have urged others to do the same.
21. In my opinion, these two groups are not representative of the wider Jewish community in the UK. They are certainly not representative of the opinions and interests of the Jewish Bloc and the widening Jewish movement supporting Palestinian rights.
22. It has unfortunately been a long-standing reality that pro-Palestinian Jewish voices are rebuffed, ignored or excluded from debates and consultations concerning the Jewish community and issues that impact us.
23. Solely consulting pro-Israeli groups on a decision to proscribe an organisation that has sought to stop weapons used by the Israeli military is, in my opinion, inadequate and irresponsible.
24. JVL and the larger Jewish Bloc represent an important segment of the Jewish community. A significant number of Jews in this category do not believe that Palestine Action was fairly proscribed. Any institutional position that claimed that such a decision would be welcomed or was done in our name is, I believe, unrepresentative and unaccountable.
Palestine Action ban—’Not in Our Name’
25. Since the proscription, several of our members have attended the protests against it and many more have been involved in the movement to protest the Home Secretary’s decision. They have discussed their intent to show the absurdity of the proscription order and to stand in the face of the government’s attempts to outlaw non-violent forms of protest.
26. The decision to attend these events has been made by each person as an individual, but JVL is concerned about the arrests of our members and their potential prosecution under terrorism legislation.
27. The experiences of some of the members who have been arrested at the mass protests in Parliament Square I exhibit as JM/03.
28. One such person, Tony Booth, JVL Environment Officer and a Professor of Education, was arrested on the 9 August and 4 October in Parliament Square. I exhibit articles as JM/04 and JM/05.
29. In these articles, and separately, Tony has noted his surprise at the incongruity between the seriousness of proscription and the police response on the 9th of August. In an article published on JVLs website, he discusses how, whilst waiting to be processed, he asked his arresting officer what he thought about the arrests and the officer told him ”we know none of you are troublemakers”. I exhibit this article as JM/06. There are similar comments by police reported in the press on 4 September 2025. I exhibit a further article from Novara Media as JM/07.
30. Graham Bash, JVL’s Political Officer, has been arrested twice at demonstrations in connection to the proscription. He’s explained that the fact that he is Jewish, has meant he feels a particular need to join these protests, in part, because he is fed up with Jewish people being equated with the state of Israel. He worries for the impact of arrest under terrorism legislation, particularly on those in more vulnerable positions than himself.
31. The genocide in Palestine is something that is close to the heart and mind of many members of JVL. They care deeply about the humanitarian situation and many, like myself, are keenly aware of a sense of responsibility in connection to this ongoing atrocity. As a colleague of mine, Rob Ferguson, has said; Jewish activists are an integral part of the Palestinian movement. To us the cause of Palestinian freedom flows through the struggle against all forms of racism and national repression and feeds back and strengthens that struggle.
32. The phrase ‘not in my name’ has been central to the Jewish Bloc marches for Palestine. It was repeated when we delivered our letter on the 5th August and it is important to me personally.
33. We say ‘not in my name’ to highlight that the decision to proscribe, the decision to continue to send arms and the decision to continue to defend Israel’s current actions are decisions that are not supported by us.
34. There are dangers from the common misconception, fed too often by politicians and the media that Jews wholeheartedly support Israel. It is vital for us to make it clear that not all or even most Jews support Israel’s actions. Recent reports indicate the number of hate crimes recorded by police in England and Wales have risen and there is reportedly evidence worldwide that ‘real’ antisemitism – hostility towards Jews – is on the rise together with Islamophobia. The cloak of false antisemitism allegations protecting Israel will of course tend to associate all Jewish people with Israeli atrocities, and the decision to crack down on freedom of speech hurts us all.
35. A decision to proscribe the first non-violent action group in the legislation’s history, and to raise the spectre of so-called antisemitic motives as justification, could give the impression that the government is privileging Jewish people; privileging our interests over Palestinian and Muslim groups.
36. This apparent privileging of lsraeli arms groups polarises the Jewish and Muslim communities. It is bad for community, for integration and for our unity in the UK. Our interests are not represented by this decision.
37. I fear for future generations of Jewish people in relation to the impact of actions that have supposedly been taken for our benefit, taken in our name. I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth.
Date: 03/11/25
Featured image via the Canary
