Leicester police ‘blanket arrest’ journalists under Terrorism Act for covering protest at Israeli drone factory

At least five journalists were arrested under the Terrorism Act while they were reporting on a protest at an Israeli-owned drone factory in Leicester last week. The journalists, which included two Leicester Gazette reporters and two union-accredited freelancers, were covering a demonstration outside UAV Tactical Systems in Leicester, a subsidiary of the Israeli arms manufacturer, Elbit Systems on 8 October. Participants held handmade signs expressing support for the proscribed direct action group, Palestine Action, an offence under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act. Emma Guy, Leicester Gazette editor, told MEE the journalists had been “blanket arrested” under Section 13 and detained by police for three hours before they were de-arrested after handing over their personal information, despite the reporters having identified themselves to multiple officers. “A decision was made by Leicestershire Police to blanket arrest journalists and then de-arrest them on a case by case basis,” Guy said. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The two freelance journalists told MEE that the protest began peacefully, and the police had agreed with the activists to disperse at midday. But when the participants attempted to leave a cordoned area around that time, they were stopped. “The police suddenly arrived in quite large numbers, and they formed a kettle,” said Matt*, a freelance photographer who used a pseudonym as he wished to remain anonymous. Shortly after, an officer announced through a megaphone that all protestors who were standing within the police cordon encircling the vigil would be arrested. 'They just arrested anybody that was in there. People that were just standing round holding banners, and people that had done nothing at all' - freelance journalist “I didn't think that necessarily would apply to press. I mean, it never does, press is always the exception,” Matt said. Both reporters who spoke to MEE said they had presented their press cards to the police in order to pass through a cordon around the protestors to do their work. “I showed them my press card a number of times in order to get through the cordon. Probably about four or five times, you know, to go out and then to come back in, and it was fine,” Matt told MEE. When he attempted to cross the cordon a final time, he was stopped and informed by a police liaison officer that he was arrested under Section 13 of the Terrorist Act for supporting a proscribed organisation. Both journalists were then informed they would be de-arrested if they handed the police their personal information, despite having already presented their press cards, which contain pin codes allowing police to verify the cardholder's identity. Police try to haul an elderly protestor into a police van outside UAV Tactical Systems in Leicester, 8 October (Martin Pope) “But they weren’t interested in that, and they didn't want to seem to check. I just think it was incredibly heavy-handed,” Matt said. “They just arrested anybody that was in there. People that were just standing round holding banners, and people that had done nothing at all.” Another freelance video-journalist who goes by the name “Barold" on social media told MEE that his arresting officer refused to speak with his representative from the National Union of Journalists. Barold told MEE that “at one point the officer negotiating my de-arrest explicitly told me that part of the purpose of the arrest was simply to ascertain people's details and find out who everyone was”. Guy said that the Leicester Gazette reporters - Joseph Herbert and Devon Winters - had identified themselves as journalists to a press liaison officer as soon as they arrived on site, and later to their arresting officers. “So this wasn't a case of misidentification,” Guy said. Former government lawyer and spokesperson for the campaign group Defend Our Juries, Tim Crosland, told MEE: “There is no legal basis for police to demand members of the public provide them with personal information generally, and definitely not as a pre-condition for ‘de-arrest’". "Such oppressive and intimidatory police conduct is characteristic of a police state, not policing by consent," he added. 'A worrying precedent As they're local to the Elbit site, Guy and her team have reported on protests there repeatedly over the last five years, but without incident. “We've never had an issue, and the process is always the same - we approach the press liason officer and introduce ourselves,” she told MEE. "This a concerning for us as a small newsroom. Like many others, we don’t go to work thinking that we’ll be arrested under the Terrorism Act. It sets a worrying precedent that journalists are being arrested for doing their jobs," she added. 'Such oppressive and intimidatory police conduct is characteristic of a police state, not policing by consent' - Tim Crosland, Defend Our Juries According to Guy, the reporters were informed by police that they were arrested under an expansion of the Terrorism Act, which includes live-streaming images or material in support of a proscribed organisation. A Leicestershire Police spokesperson told MEE in response to a request for comment that: “A number of people identifying themselves as journalists were at the scene of protest activity on Thursday 8 October in Meridian Way, Braunstone. “To affect a thorough investigation, due to the circumstances and number of people at the scene, everyone was placed under arrest and told to remain in the area,” the spokesperson said. “Once these individuals had been spoken to, details provided to officers and it was established that no offences had been committed, they were de-arrested," they said, adding that they had not been taken into custody. When asked by MEE whether officers had accused any journalists of live streaming the event, the spokesperson referred to a statement confirming that a total of 35 people had been arrested under Section 13, with one person "further arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated public order," and taken into police custody. It added that all 35 have been released on conditional bail. A woman surrounded by police holds a placard expressing support for Palestine Action outside UAV Tactical Systems in Leicester, 8 October 2026 (Martin Pope) Laura Davison, NUJ general secretary, said that union is "concerned" by reports of the arrests and has written to the National Police Chiefs' Council "over concerns of police overreach". Davison said that the union had emphasised following the government's ban that "covering Palestine Action protests and taking photographs or videos of the group's placards does not in of itself constitute support for the group". Defend Our Juries confirmed to MEE that, despite lots of filming and livestreaming of previous protests, no one has previously been arrested for doing so. ‘You don't know if you're gonna come home’ Both journalists who spoke to MEE said that they observed interactions between Elbit security staff and police officers. Matt, who has covered a number of protests at Elbit sites, said that he has noted communication between the arms firm's security staff and the police during previous demonstrations. “As a journalist, you don't feel entirely safe. You’re made to feel that you shouldn't really be there,” he said. 'As a journalist, you don't feel entirely safe. You’re made to feel that you shouldn't really be there' - Matt, freelance photographer “It seems to be particularly difficult at Elbit Systems sites. It's becoming almost impossible," he added. "You can't relax. You don't really know if you're ever gonna come home. It acts as a deterrent.” Matt said he has been reporting on demonstrations for around 40 years, but that he has been arrested five times in the last three years, all in relation to his coverage of Palestine Action protests. In April 2025, he was arrested while covering a Palestine Action protest outside a Lockheed Martin site in Ampthill under suspicion of conspiracy to commit burglary. He said he was alleged to have fired fireworks out of his car, when he was actually taking photographs of the action from outside the main gate. He was detained for 20 hours, with his car and his devices seized. He said that he subsequently won a settlement from Bedfordshire Police over the arrest. When contacted for comment, Bedfordshire Police said that they “maintained that officers had reasonable grounds to make the arrest based on the information available to them at the time, and that their actions were proportionate in the circumstances”. The spokesperson acknowledged that the force made an offer to settle Matt's claim, and that it was done “without any admission of liability by the force and without any court determination on the facts of the case or liability”. A month later, Matt was arrested under suspicion of committing a hate crime after photographing the aftermath of a Palestine Action protest targeting what the Metropolitan police described as a “Jewish-owned business". MEE previously reported that photos of the targeted site suggest that the business's address corresponds to that of Discovery Park Ltd, which owns a business park where a subsidiary of Elbit Systems is headquartered. The Metropolitan Police have not responded to MEE's request for comment.