He had been asked by the second most senior judge in England and Wales, Sir Geoffrey Vos, if he accepted that the ban was legally unusual because of its impact on the right to protest by otherwise legitimate demonstrators.
Sir James Eadie KC said: “The rights of those who would otherwise wish to support Palestine Action are affected… maybe they don’t even support the more extreme activities and/or wing of Palestine Action.
“But the whole nature and structure of the proscription regime is designed to recognise that there is value in preventing precisely that sort of support.”
He also told the court that Parliament had given ministers discretion over how to take such decisions once there had been an expert finding that an organisation was “concerned in terrorism”.
“Parliament was alive to the fact that those powers conferred on the secretary of state were significant powers,” Sir James told the judges.
“Palestine Action met the statutory definition of being concerned in terrorism.
“The secretary of state’s expert advice was that Palestine Action’s activities were on an escalating trajectory of seriousness.”