In two weeks’ time, the Filton 4 will be banned from receiving letters from supportive members of the public

Alarming news from the Free the Filton 25 campaign, which reports that, because of the “terrorism connection” that Mr. Justice Johnson grafted onto the sentencing of the Filton 4 — for criminal damage relating to their direct action against a factory owned by Elbit Systems, Israel’s biggest arms company, in August 2024 — they will, in two weeks’ time, be prevented from receiving letters from supportive members of the general public.

Please visit the page for details of how and where to send letters, the interests of each of the Filton 4, and which topics to avoid to even have a chance of your letters getting through. As the campaign notes, “Unfortunately, the guards get to decide whether the prisoners receive their letters or not.”

For some insight into the conditions faced by the Filton activists when they were held on remand — for up to a year and a half — before the collapse of the first trial of the Filton 6 secured the release of all of them on bail, I recommend “Letter from a British political prisoner for Palestine”, by T Hoxha, one of the next eight of the Filton 25, whose trial began last week at the Old Bailey, which was published by The Electronic Intifada in November (see the link below).

T described a regime in which the proscription of Palestine Action as a terrorist organization, which took place after activists had been held on remand for up to eleven months, immediately changed how they were treated — essentially as terrorists. They were removed from jobs they had been doing for “security reasons”, with T removed from her job as a library assistant, even though, as she explained, “I learned that the previous library orderly had a higher security clearance than I do – yet she had murdered both her parents and buried them under the patio.”

T also reported how she “overheard two officers telling a prisoner that saying ‘Free Palestine’ was terrorism.” She submitted a formal complaint to the prison authorities, but, as she stated, “It became clear that these officers were simply repeating talking points and instructions from above. The officers themselves did not know about Palestine, nor could they answer why supporting Palestine was terrorism. The proscription had the consequence of conflating support for Palestine with holding terrorist and extremist views.”

T was held, at the time, at HMP Peterborough, but she heard that, in October, her co-defendants at HMP Bronzefield “had their kuffiyehs removed under the pretext that they were the clothing of a terrorist organization.”

As she noted, “The patterns on kuffiyehs, as we know, are a celebration of Palestinian identity, comparable perhaps to the functions of the kilt or Guernsey knit. Since the kuffiyeh has no relation to any particular organization, what is being deemed as terrorism is therefore the Palestinian identity.”

Describing how “the strategy the state has used has made us targets inside prison”, she stated, “We are the punching bags of the proscription”, explaining, “We have been removed from and refused jobs, called terrorists, harassed by guards, had social visits canceled, had our mail blocked, and I had to go on a 28-day hunger strike to get my basic needs met. Our bail applications have been continuously denied, and my male co-defendants are being held in filthy, depressing conditions.”

However, she added, “The case of the Filton 24 must be seen as part of the bigger picture. We might not get told much as prisoners, and we’re often the last to know anything pertaining to ourselves, but what is clear as day is that what is being criminalized is not ‘extremism’, but the Palestinian identity itself. What’s been proscribed is any engagement with the Palestinian identity. The Filton 24 are a test case and a warning to anyone who shows solidarity with Palestine.”