{"id":412282,"date":"2026-02-07T03:36:07","date_gmt":"2026-02-07T03:36:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/412282\/"},"modified":"2026-02-07T03:36:07","modified_gmt":"2026-02-07T03:36:07","slug":"interview-with-a-uk-national-security-lawyer-were-not-here-to-deter-them-from-following-their-conscience-in-the-face-of-genocide-jurist-features","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/412282\/","title":{"rendered":"Interview with a UK National Security Lawyer: ‘We’re not here to deter them from following their conscience in the face of genocide.’ – JURIST – Features"},"content":{"rendered":"

In this interview, national security lawyer Fahad Ansari<\/a> speaks with JURIST News Associate Editorial Director, Alanah Vargas, about the transformation of the London-based law firm Riverway Law into Riverway to the Sea<\/a>\u2014a movement-embedded legal training and advocacy organization dedicated to confronting Zionism, and defending Palestinian liberation<\/a> and anti-colonial resistance. He explains how the organization is reimagining the relationship between legal practice and activism, training lawyers and activists internationally, and pushing back against what he describes as the United Kingdom\u2019s increasingly repressive counterterrorism framework, pointing to the recent designation of Palestine Action<\/a> as a \u201cterrorist\u201d organization.<\/p>\n

Riverway Law\u2019s transition into Riverway to the Sea marks a powerful evolution in movement lawyering. Can you walk us through how this transformation came about and what it represents for the broader struggle for Palestinian liberation?<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve been having discussions for many months now, as everybody else has, in light of the live-streamed genocide<\/a> that is keeping everybody up at night. We looked at our skills and our assets, and asked: how can we best utilize these to try and stop the genocide and ensure that it doesn\u2019t happen ever again?<\/p>\n

Because it\u2019s one thing to get a so-called ceasefire<\/a>; it\u2019s another to ensure that, once and for all, Palestinians are free and not subject to the racist, fascist ideology of Zionism<\/a>, imposed upon them by the apartheid<\/a> state of Israel and its imperial allies.<\/p>\n

When we looked around at the movement, at colleagues and comrades and what they were up to, it seemed very limited in its vision: call for a ceasefire, hold a march every week. I\u2019m not saying these things don\u2019t have utility, but they\u2019re limited. They were doing nothing to actually stop the genocide, nothing to make a dent in the war machinery.<\/p>\n

What did make a dent in the war machinery, literally, was the work of Palestine Action, who were recently proscribed<\/a> as a banned terrorist group in Britain because of their involvement in smashing up Israeli weapons factories, thereby disrupting the flow of arms to the genocidal entity.<\/p>\n

The analogy would be: someone is walking in with a gun to slaughter a group of children. A large group of people are protesting outside, holding placards, but the assailant walks right past them. Then others decide: we\u2019re going to grab the gun. They take that risk and disarm the attacker\u2014and the children survive in a way they wouldn\u2019t have otherwise.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s the power of direct action. As lawyers, we asked ourselves: what are we doing? We\u2019re always on the back foot\u2014bringing actions, challenging the government\u2019s decision to sell weapons to Israel, dragging it out for years. And in court, once \u201cnational security\u201d is raised, judges invariably defer to the government.<\/p>\n

My colleague Franck Magennis and I ran cases differently. We argued that any case involving Palestine or Israel requires understanding the background: apartheid, Zionist ideology, history. That context is crucial. We even had clients like a rabbinical student who refused to join the [Israeli Defense Forces] (IDF) because he believed Israel\u2019s existence was sinful. Other clients refused to speak Hebrew, demanding Yiddish interpreters because they viewed Hebrew as the language of occupation.<\/p>\n

Our vision became clear: this couldn\u2019t just be a solicitor\u2019s practice. We needed something new. Riverway to the Sea would be the education and training wing. We\u2019d train lawyers in Britain and abroad to run these challenges, as well as activists and communities. We\u2019d create space for screenings, book readings, podcasts\u2014a cultural hub as much as a legal one.<\/p>\n

Internationally, we envision an umbrella body. If a firm in Vienna or elsewhere shares our principles, they can affiliate, receive training, and coordinate challenges with us across jurisdictions. Already, after our application for the de-proscription of Hamas, we\u2019ve had teams from Australia, Austria, the Netherlands, and Sweden reach out to coordinate similar challenges.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve also taken on issues like the [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance] (IHRA) definition<\/a> of antisemitism, which conflates criticism of Israel with antisemitism. My colleague Franck argued<\/a> in the High Court that Zionism is a fascist ideology. The client lost his case, but the judgment was groundbreaking: it said it is not antisemitic to call for the abolition of Israel, to call it a racist state, or to compare it to Nazi Germany. That\u2019s critical.<\/p>\n

So our vision is clear: we need a structure that connects legal work with activism, globally, with courage and without apology.<\/p>\n

This model of a \u201cmovement-embedded legal organisation\u201d transcends the traditional boundaries of legal practice. How do you envision this reconfiguration changing the relationship between lawyers and liberation movements on the ground?<\/p>\n

Very often activists who get into difficulty will go to a lawyer. There are two scenarios. Beforehand: asking if doing something will break the law. Afterwards: asking for help getting out of trouble. Most lawyers in the first scenario adopt an overly cautious approach and say: don\u2019t do it, you\u2019ll break the law, you\u2019ll be prosecuted. That advice paralyzes movements.<\/p>\n

We take a different approach. We explain the law, the risks, and the possibility of a bad faith prosecution. But we leave the decision to the activist. We\u2019re not here to deter them from following their conscience in the face of genocide. International law itself is broken. Laws in Israel are immoral. As Dr Martin Luther King Jr. famously stated, \u201cOne has a legal and a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.\u201d As with apartheid or slavery, laws must sometimes be broken.<\/p>\n

So if activists decide to attack weapons factories, hang flags, or protest, we\u2019ll stand by them. When they get into difficulty, we act on their instructions. We don\u2019t impose false narratives, like telling asylum<\/a> seekers to say they\u2019re bisexual to get protection. We don\u2019t deter clients who want to defend Hamas as the last line of defense against extermination. If they want to take that stand in court, we\u2019ll help them articulate it. It is a basic pillar of a just legal system that everyone is entitled to legal advice.<\/p>\n

We follow their lead while advising on risks. We don\u2019t just run legal defenses; we contextualize them, educate juries, and ensure the truth is heard. It is the job of a lawyer to put their client\u2019s case in the broadest terms possible so that their actions are put into the appropriate context.<\/p>\n

Palestine Action has been designated by the UK government as a \u201cterrorist\u201d organization, part of a broader pattern of legal pressure on pro-Palestinian activism. How is Riverway to the Sea positioning itself to respond to this climate and support anti-colonial resistance?<\/p>\n

Much of the repression we\u2019re seeing now has roots in earlier counterterrorism legislation. In Britain, it began with Ireland. The Terrorism Act 2000<\/a> internationalized those measures, and for the first time, Palestinian resistance groups were criminalized.<\/p>\n

Over time, the UK shifted to banning not only military wings of groups like Hamas, but eventually entire organizations, intentionally eliminating any potential for political dialogue. That\u2019s unprecedented in British history\u2014even with Sinn F\u00e9in<\/a> and the [Irish Republican Army] (IRA), dialogue was always maintained as Sinn F\u00e9in was never proscribed .<\/p>\n

Now, Palestine Action has been banned. Within 72 hours, 110 people were arrested as \u201cterrorists\u201d for holding placards saying \u201cI oppose genocide. \u201cI support Palestine Action.\u201d They sent busloads of police to arrest elderly people. By December last year, arrests for terrorist-related offences were up 660 percent, the vast majority linked to people holding placards. This shows the authoritarian trajectory of Britain.<\/p>\n

We\u2019ve seen this pattern before: Muslims convicted of terrorism for possessing a London Underground map, or for writing poetry. Britain has long been a police state, but now repression is expanding beyond Muslims to the wider public. Protesters, students, even elderly activists are targeted.<\/p>\n

Riverway to the Sea exists to push back\u2014to challenge proscription, defend activists, and coordinate internationally so that repression in one country doesn\u2019t silence movements everywhere.<\/p>\n

Riverway to the Sea Director Franck Magennis described the new Centre as a place where \u201cthe law becomes a living weapon in the struggle for liberation.\u201d What does that mean to you in terms of legal education, litigation, and organizing?<\/p>\n

Legal education will target three groups: lawyers, activists, and communities.<\/p>\n

For lawyers, it means training them in strategies for de-proscription challenges, regulatory cases, employment, asylum, and more. For activists, it means \u201cknow your rights\u201d training\u2014not to deter them, but to empower them to act despite risks. For communities, it means building political consciousness: film screenings, book readings, panel discussions, podcasts, cultural education.<\/p>\n

It will be international and collaborative. Training in Germany, for example, must be different from training in Ireland. We\u2019re developing partnerships across Europe, South Africa, and beyond. South African veterans of [Nelson] Mandela\u2019s struggle have already endorsed us, recognizing parallels in how Britain once smeared their lawyers.<\/p>\n

Ultimately, \u201claw as a weapon\u201d is about fighting injustice and means refusing to let it be used only against resistance. We reclaim it\u2014in courts, in communities, and across borders.<\/p>\n

Riverway and similar groups have been described in the media using terms like \u201cradical\u201d or \u201cextreme,\u201d in ways that seem to echo official state narratives. How do you engage with that kind of framing, and what responsibility do you think the media has in shaping how the public understands movements for liberation?<\/p>\n

To be smeared by senior politicians and media is tough, but it\u2019s also a badge of honor. If racist, Zionist politicians attack us, it means we\u2019re effective.<\/p>\n

Even when deciding on the name change, we chose \u201cRiverway to the Sea\u201d because it was provocative, visionary, and resonant with the movement. If detractors dislike it, that only confirms we\u2019re on the right path.<\/p>\n

We also recognize that persecution is part of solidarity. Palestinians live their entire lives in prison cells of various kinds. If we face some inconvenience or regulatory investigation, that\u2019s the price of standing with them.<\/p>\n

I have faced regulatory investigations over allegations that by taking on a de-proscription case, I brought the profession into disrepute and supported terrorism. Politicians like Robert Jenrick have smeared me, alleging I broke sanctions. None of it is true, but it chills other lawyers. Files have been demanded, witness statements scrutinized.<\/p>\n

This is designed to isolate and deter us. But instead, it has mobilized solidarity. We\u2019ve been invited to international conferences, legal groups abroad want to coordinate, and more lawyers are finding the courage to act.<\/p>\n

So yes, the mainstream media parrots state narratives. But our response is to keep working, keep expanding, and keep speaking the truth.<\/p>\n

You\u2019ve moved away from the traditional solicitor-barrister hierarchy toward a unified, collective legal approach. How does this model better support movements facing repression, and what lessons does it offer legal practitioners working in other contexts of state violence?<\/p>\n

In Britain, the legal profession is divided: solicitors prepare cases, barristers argue them in court. Traditionally, the interaction is minimal.<\/p>\n

But we worked differently. Barristers like Franck worked with us in the office, side by side, preparing cases, strategizing with expert witnesses. We collaborated with academics and activists, all working together to create a powerful narrative. It created a collective energy that made our work stronger.<\/p>\n

This model\u2014dissolving rigid hierarchies, embedding lawyers together\u2014is what movements under repression need. It ensures cases are run with full context, with political and legal arguments intertwined, and with solidarity at the core.<\/p>\n

With partners across Europe, the \u201cMiddle East,\u201d and the Global South, Riverway to the Sea is building an international legal front. What possibilities and challenges do you see in coordinating legal resistance across jurisdictions?<\/p>\n

The challenge is jurisdictional differences. But with affiliates, each firm can remain independent while sharing training, strategies, and coordinated action.<\/p>\n

For example, our success in challenging the IHRA definition in London can be replicated elsewhere by affiliated lawyers. Strategically, that would be devastating to those who weaponize the definition to silence criticism of Israel.<\/p>\n

We\u2019re already building partnerships in South Africa, Ireland, Germany, and beyond. Each place requires its own strategy, but collectively, we can weaken Zionism\u2019s global hold.<\/p>\n

In a time when the law is often weaponized against resistance, what does it mean to reclaim it in the service of liberation, from Britain to Palestine, from the courtroom to the street?<\/p>\n

It means refusing to accept the state\u2019s monopoly over law, whilst recognising the inherent constraints of the discipline. It means challenging bans, contesting false definitions, defending activists unapologetically, and embedding law within movements.<\/p>\n

It means acknowledging that Zionism is weak, in a terminal crisis, its leaders indicted as war criminals, its state isolated as a pariah. We must capitalize on that weakness, push forward, and ensure the law serves justice and liberation rather than repression.<\/p>\n

What message would you send to young lawyers, law students, or community organizers who want to use the law to promote anti-colonial and anti-apartheid values but are afraid of backlash or professional risk, or feeling apathetic in general about the rule of law\u2019s role in advancing justice?<\/p>\n

It\u2019s time to take Zionism on. This is not the time to apologize or duck. Palestinians have shown us resilience\u2014healthcare workers, journalists, people who risk their families\u2019 lives every time they work. They are the real heroes.<\/p>\n

As lawyers, we must stand at the forefront. Silence is complicity. If you see colleagues persecuted, don\u2019t keep your head down. Show solidarity, stand up, and ensure repression doesn\u2019t deter others. The role played by lawyers in the anti-apartheid movement and Mandela himself illustrates that oppressive and discriminatory laws can be overturned to create a more just and fair society.<\/p>\n

This is the atrocity of our times. History will judge us. We must be counted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"In this interview, national security lawyer Fahad Ansari speaks with JURIST News Associate Editorial Director, Alanah Vargas, about…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":412283,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[3],"tags":[59,57,58,50,56,54,55],"class_list":{"0":"post-412282","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-united-kingdom","8":"tag-gb","9":"tag-great-britain","10":"tag-greatbritain","11":"tag-news","12":"tag-uk","13":"tag-united-kingdom","14":"tag-unitedkingdom"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/412282","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=412282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/412282\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/412283"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=412282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=412282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=412282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}