UK Prosecutors Drop Aggravated Burglary Charges Against All 24 Palestine Action Defendants in Elbit Factory Case

Inside Courtroom 3 at Woolwich Crown Court on Wednesday morning, prosecutor Deanna Heer KC rose to deliver a statement that effectively dismantled the most serious charge in one of Britain's most politically charged criminal cases. The Crown, she told Mr Justice Johnson, was offering no evidence on count one — aggravated burglary — against all remaining defendants in the Filton24 case .

The announcement means that all 24 people accused of the 6 August 2024 raid on an Elbit Systems factory in Filton, near Bristol, have now been formally cleared of the charge that carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment . It marks a dramatic collapse in the prosecution's strategy and the second significant legal defeat for the government's approach to Palestine Action in the space of five days.

The decision followed the acquittal earlier this month of the first six defendants to stand trial. Charlotte Head, 29, Samuel Corner, 23, Leona Kamio, 30, Fatema Rajwani, 21, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, were all found not guilty of aggravated burglary by a jury after a trial at the same court . The jury also acquitted Rajwani, Rogers, and Devlin of violent disorder, though it failed to reach verdicts on remaining charges including criminal damage .

The prosecution's case had rested on the argument that the activists' use of sledgehammers during the factory break-in constituted weapons intended to cause injury — a necessary element of the aggravated burglary charge. Defence lawyers successfully argued the tools were intended solely for property destruction at the Elbit site, not to harm people . The jury's verdict on the first batch of defendants left the CPS with no realistic prospect of securing convictions against the remaining eighteen on the same charge.

Heer confirmed, however, that the Crown intends to pursue retrials on the charges where the jury could not reach verdicts after more than 36 hours of deliberation. Criminal damage charges remain against all defendants, and three face retrial on violent disorder counts . Several of the eighteen defendants who had been held on remand — some for over 18 months — were expected to apply for bail in hearings scheduled for Wednesday and Friday.

The Filton24 Defence Committee called the outcome a "significant victory," arguing that the aggravated burglary charge had been "used as a tool to repress the defendants and justify imprisoning them for up to two years before trial, which far exceeded the six-month custody time limit" . The committee's statement underscored what critics have long contended: that the severity of charges brought against Palestine Action members has been disproportionate to the conduct alleged.

The timing compounds an already difficult week for the Home Office. On 13 February, three High Court judges ruled that the government's proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation was "disproportionate and unlawful," finding that most of the group's activities did not reach the level, scale, or persistence required to be classified as terrorism . The government has said it will appeal the ruling, and the ban remains temporarily in place, but the judgment struck at the legal foundation of the crackdown.

Palestine Action was proscribed under the Terrorism Act in July 2025, making membership or support for the group a criminal offence punishable by up to fourteen years in prison. The ban followed years of direct action targeting Elbit Systems' UK operations, including factory occupations, roof-top protests, and property damage at sites across England. In the months following proscription, more than 1,600 arrests were linked to Palestine-related activism, according to Al Jazeera's reporting .

Elbit Systems, Israel's largest private defence contractor, has been a focal point for pro-Palestinian campaigners who argue the company's drone technology, surveillance systems, and munitions are used in military operations in Gaza and the occupied West Bank. The company's Filton factory — the very site at the centre of the Filton24 case — was reported by The Guardian in September 2025 to have quietly closed, found deserted aside from security staff despite holding a lease running until 2029. Palestine Action claimed the closure as a victory for its campaign of economic disruption.

The legal developments sit within a broader pattern of jury acquittals in cases involving Palestine solidarity activists. In previous trials, juries have declined to convict activists of criminal damage to Elbit facilities, with defence teams arguing that the actions were justified to prevent what they characterised as complicity in violations of international humanitarian law. These acquittals have frustrated prosecutors and raised questions about whether the legal system's response to direct action campaigns is aligned with public sentiment — particularly since the escalation of the Gaza conflict in October 2023.

Critics of Palestine Action, including the Israeli government and pro-Israel advocacy groups, maintain that the group's tactics constitute criminal intimidation and have caused millions of pounds in damage to legitimate businesses. Elbit Systems has previously stated that its UK operations are fully compliant with British export licensing requirements and serve NATO allies' defence needs. Conservative commentators have argued that jury acquittals in such cases risk normalising political violence against lawful enterprises and undermining the rule of law.

The Home Office has consistently defended both the proscription and the aggressive prosecution strategy, arguing that Palestine Action's escalating tactics — from paint-throwing to factory invasions involving dozens of participants — crossed the line from lawful protest into organised criminal activity. Ministers have pointed to the sledgehammer-wielding raids as evidence that the group poses a genuine threat to public safety, not merely to property.

Yet the Wednesday hearing exposed the gap between the government's rhetoric and the evidential reality. With the aggravated burglary charges now abandoned across the board, the remaining allegations — criminal damage and violent disorder — carry significantly lower maximum sentences and lack the symbolic weight that life-imprisonment charges brought to the prosecution's narrative.

For the defendants still on remand, the immediate question is bail. Thirteen of the eighteen had filed applications by Wednesday's hearing, with decisions expected over the coming days . For the broader Palestine solidarity movement, the question is whether two legal defeats in a single week signal a turning point in the government's ability to suppress direct action through the courts — or whether the Home Office's promised appeal of the proscription ruling will reset the landscape entirely.

The case also raises uncomfortable questions about proportionality in the British justice system. Defendants who were ultimately cleared of the most serious charges spent up to eighteen months in custody awaiting trial — longer than many convicted offenders serve for comparable property offences. Civil liberties organisations, including Liberty and the Palestine Solidarity Campaign, have argued that the prolonged pre-trial detention amounted to punishment without conviction, a practice they say has a chilling effect on legitimate protest rights.

What happens next depends in part on the retrial proceedings and in part on the Court of Appeal's treatment of the proscription ruling. If the High Court's finding of unlawfulness is upheld, the entire legal framework underpinning the prosecution of Palestine Action members could be called into question. If it is overturned, the government will have restored its most powerful tool for criminalising the group — but will still face juries who have shown a consistent reluctance to convict.