On 28th November 2025, Network for Police Monitoring (Netpol) revealed that the government is drawing up plans to grant police and courts sweeping new powers to declare entire protest or dissent movements as “subversive” — effectively labelling civil resistance itself as a security threat.

Under the proposals, activism and protest could be judged not as expressions of political opinion or civil disobedience, but as acts of subversion — allowing authorities to use draconian, counter-terror style laws against ordinary citizens. This would mark a dramatic expansion of criminalisation, shifting dissent from the domain of protest law into national security, and putting climate, social justice and anti-war campaigns at serious risk.

If implemented, these powers would not just punish individual actions — they would threaten the very right to protest itself, making activism a potential crime. That means that even non-violent acts of solidarity, resistance or civil disobedience could be re-branded as hostile to the state.

The Court of Appeal is hearing the directly related JPMorgan appeal this morning (4 December) at the Royal Courts of Justice — a case which could become the test case for whether juries may still apply conscience in protest trials. The outcome matters here because the appeal challenges Judge Reid’s warnings to jurors and seeks to reaffirm the ancient doctrine of ‘jury equity’; a Court of Appeal ruling against that principle would immediately deepen the threat described above by making it far easier for judges to remove conscience-based verdicts from protest cases.

What is being proposed

• According to reporting by The Guardian, the Ministry of Justice is considering reforms that would restrict jury trials to only the most serious crimes — such as murder, rape and manslaughter — meaning that the majority of criminal cases, including many protest-related offences, could instead be decided by a single judge.
• The government has framed the proposals as a response to the ongoing crisis in the courts, pointing to the Crown Court backlog of more than 78,000 unresolved cases as justification for accelerating trials and reducing reliance on juries.
• However, legal professionals and civil liberties organisations, including the Law Society and Liberty, have warned that removing juries from most trials would weaken a central democratic protection by concentrating decision-making power in the hands of individual judges and diminishing public oversight of the justice system

It’s not just about the backlog, it’s a systemic shift

This move must be understood not in isolation, but as part of a broader wave of legal and institutional pressure on protest, dissent, and civil society:

• The recent Palestine Action case has shown how protest groups; even non-violent ones, can be criminalised under sweeping proscription laws. The judicial review of that ban has been thrown into doubt after a last-minute change of judges, prompting accusations of legal manipulation and undermining confidence in judicial independence.
• In recent years, activists from movements such as Just Stop Oil and climate justice groups tied to Extinction Rebellion have faced some of the harshest punishments ever meted out for non-violent protest; prison sentences, criminal records, labels of “extremism.” 

It is no exaggeration to say that this moment represents a turning point. Justice is no longer just about the law, it is becoming a political instrument against dissent.

Why XRUK cares — and why you should, too

For organisations like us (committed to climate justice, systemic change, and non-violent direct action) the right to protest — and to have justice judged by a jury of one’s peers — is not optional, it is essential.

• Jury trial offers a guard against state overreach, and a way for ordinary members of society to judge right and wrong beyond legal technicalities.
• They allow social context, conscience, and public values to be heard — so the process is not just focused on legal loopholes or procedural rules.
• They have, historically, been one of the few limitations on authoritarian drift in the history of Britain.

If the government succeeds in stripping most people of that right, future protestors — climate, social, economic — will be far more vulnerable.

📢 XRUK calls for:

• An immediate halt to any reforms that scrap or restrict jury trials for non-violent protest or political/environmental offences.
• Full public debate on justice reform — not backroom memos or rushed legislation pushed through amid judicial backlog panic.
• Recognition that justice must serve the people — not silence them.

Because when justice becomes a tool of suppression, resistance becomes not only a moral duty, but a necessity.

What is next and what you can do

• Share this message. Share the facts.
• Stand with other movements under attack — from anti-war solidarity groups to climate and social justice actions — it is all rooted in the same systems of control, extraction and inequality.
• Demand that MPs and the media defend the right to jury trial — and campaign for real investment in justice infrastructure, not shortcuts that erode democracy.
• Support groups like Defend Our Juries and civil liberties organisations reporting on these changes.

History shows us that, back when the right to peaceful protest and jury justice mattered, people came together and fought for their rights. We have to act now, or risk losing the very foundations of dissent, democracy, and humanity itself.