Mother Alarmed by Daughter’s Detention Under Terrorist Legislation

Clare Rogers’ daughter was apprehended in August following her alleged involvement in direct action at an Israeli defence company situated close to Bristol. Rogers stated, “I discovered, three days in, still no phone call, that she was held under the Terrorist Act. And that meant seven days in solitary, and no right to a phone call… It was shocking.” Zoe Rogers, aged 21, is among several pro-Palestinian demonstrators facing charges concerning an event at Elbit UK, which is a division of Elbit Systems, an international Israeli defence corporation. Zoe subsequently faced charges of criminal damage, violent disorder, and aggravated burglary, and was refused bail. Her trial is scheduled for November 2025. Clare remarked, “The idea of my daughter being branded a terrorist just fills me with horror.” She further stated: “Someone who believes so passionately in justice, is lamenting the deaths of innocent civilians and children. To be called a terrorist? “That really disgusts me. “It makes me very angry and it worries me about the future of activists in this country, and the expression of free speech.”” Despite Zoe not being charged with a terrorism offence, she and other activists apprehended concurrently were denied bail due to the Crown Prosecution Service’s assertion of a potential terror connection. This marked Zoe’s first alleged offence. Clare tearfully recounted, “The day she appeared in court I will remember for the rest of my life. I hadn’t seen her for seven days. I hadn’t been able to speak to her.” “The judge said ‘no bail’, and the next few seconds she was led out of the courtroom.” “That memory, it will stay with me forever. It was literally my child being taken away from me. I will never rid myself of that memory and the trauma that went with it.” Clare describes her daughter, saying, “She is someone who is very loving and very shy. She thinks very deeply and cares very deeply about social justice. She started to see what was unfolding in Gaza and that became a huge part of her life.” Zoe participated in the majority of pro-Gaza demonstrations advocating for an immediate ceasefire, but began to experience discouragement. She conveyed to her mother: “Mum the marches aren’t working, the government’s not listening.” Sukaina Rajwani, a resident of Merton in south London, also had her daughter, Fatema Zainab, arrested and charged in connection with the same operation; Fatema Zainab is likewise being held without bail. She informed BBC London, “I believe the counter-terrorism legislation was used to intimidate and scare them and used as an excuse to keep them for longer.” “I honestly thought she would get bail because she doesn’t have a criminal record or convictions. She met all the bail conditions.” “She is literally a baby for me. She had only just turned 20 a week before.” Both Clare and Sukaina stated they were unaware their daughters might have been planning direct action alongside the group Palestine Action. Palestine Action, in a statement provided to the BBC, defended direct action and denounced the application of anti-terror legislation. The statement read: “Elbit Systems, Israel’s largest weapons producer, market their arms as “battle-tested” on the Palestinian people. By misusing counter-terrorism powers against those who take direct action to shut Elbit down, the state is prioritising the interests of a foreign weapons manufacturer over the rights and freedoms of its own citizens.” Elbit Systems UK communicated to the BBC: “We are proud to provide critical support and advanced technology to the British armed forces from our sites in Bristol, and this work has continued uninterrupted today.” “Any claims that these facilities supply the Israeli military or Israeli Ministry of Defence are completely false.” Certain human rights organizations in the UK have expressed apprehension that the legal definition of terrorism is excessively broad and is progressively being employed to suppress legitimate protest and free speech. Furthermore, organizations like the National Union of Journalists (NUJ) have voiced concerns regarding the police’s utilization of counter-terrorism legislation. Michelle Stanistreet, the general secretary of the NUJ, stated: “The rise in the use of counter-terror legislation by British police against journalists is alarming and we are concerned recent cases are without clear or sufficient explanation to those under investigation. “Being able to report freely on issues in the public interest without fear of arrest is a fair expectation for every journalist abiding by the union’s code of conduct. We have urged an end to the apparent targeting for its harm on a free press and the risks posed to both journalists and their sources.” Conversely, Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, holds the view that the law is generally being applied correctly. He commented: “Just gluing yourself to the road is never going to be terrorism. Holding a placard is never going to be terrorism unless it’s for a proscribed organisation. It’s got to be serious violence against people or serious damage to property.” “It’s got to hit that seriousness threshold before that could even apply.” Nevertheless, he acknowledges that it is a valid criticism that authorities possess considerable power in the context of terrorism arrests. He noted that these situations represent an operational decision for the police. Michael Mansfield KC, a prominent barrister specializing in human rights and civil liberties, informed the BBC, without addressing this particular case, that he considers protest a right, not a crime. He stated: “There are very serious concerns and have been since the beginning that governments of whatever hue, governments may use this legislation to clamp down on protests.” “Being a terrorist under the Act, it isn’t just a matter of holding extreme views. Extreme views are not enough.” “So I think it requires responsible prosecutors who look very carefully before attaching that label. And of course, protest has become criminalised.” Mr. Mansfield further remarked, “Whether the crime you’ve committed is terrorism, that is the question. Some of these issues are in the eye of the beholder.” The prospect of being detained without bail until November 2025 has significantly impacted the lives of both Zoe and Fatema, with their university placements now jeopardized. Clare, whose daughter has received an autism diagnosis, commented: “She should be at university now. She’d got a place to start this autumn, her first year at university.” “She worked so hard for that place. She had to do an extra year of sixth form because of Covid; she didn’t get the A-levels she needed for her chosen university. “She did another year of study, got the place, and now she can’t start. She can’t even start next year, because she will be standing trial. That has been devastating for her.” Fatema Zainab would currently be undertaking her final year in media studies at Goldsmith University if she were not incarcerated. Sukaina stated: “God forbid if they do not get bail on their next appeal, then she will try to defer for another year. It’s all unchartered waters. Every day brings a new challenge.” Clare was asked if a distinction exists between the right to free speech and direct action. She asserted: “Someone taking direct action to disrupt the Israeli arms industry, there is a law that oversees that and it is called criminal damage. It’s not terrorism.” “If you look at what the suffragettes did, they were quite violent, they destroyed property, they put bricks through windows. We look on them as heroes.” “I think people will look back at people who took direct action in this context as heroes in the future.” Update 26th November: This article has been modified to incorporate additional pertinent quotes from Michael Mansfield KC concerning the issues he perceives as arising from the application of this legislation in protest-related cases. Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hello.bbclondon@bbc.co.uk Copyright 2024 BBC. All rights reserved. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.