A 20-year-old Palestinian student, Dana Abu Qamar, has successfully appealed a UK Home Office decision that revoked her student visa over her statements about the Israel-Gaza conflict. The tribunal ruled in her favor, citing freedom of expression protections, and set a precedent for Palestinian rights activism in the UK.
Background of the Case
In December 2023, Abu Qamar, a dual Jordanian-Canadian citizen studying law at the University of Manchester, was stripped of her student visa by the Home Office. Authorities argued her presence was “not conducive to the public good,” following her comments at a university rally about Gaza’s historical resistance to Israeli actions. She described the ongoing events as “a once in a lifetime experience” and expressed both pride and fear over the situation. Her statements, made during an interview with Sky News, caught the attention of the Home Office and prompted the involvement of then-immigration minister Robert Jenrick, who instructed officials to revoke her visa.
Read More: Outcry as Israel bans main UN Palestinian aid agency
Freedom of Speech Protected
The tribunal concluded that the Home Office had failed to demonstrate Abu Qamar’s statements constituted extremism or support for terrorist actions. According to the judgment, her language—including terms like “apartheid” and “actively resisting”—was consistent with views often expressed by human rights organizations about Israel and Palestine. The court underscored that support for the Palestinian cause, including lawful resistance to occupation, should not be conflated with support for Hamas, which the UK designates as a terrorist organization. It further emphasized that there was “no support for Hamas specifically” in her statements, noting that Abu Qamar’s words reflected advocacy for Palestinian rights, not violence against civilians.
Judge Melanie Plimmer stated that the Home Office’s decision amounted to a “disproportionate interference” with Abu Qamar’s freedom of speech as guaranteed under the European Convention on Human Rights. She was also clear that Abu Qamar is “not an extremist” and, according to evidence, had no intention to condone acts of violence.
Political Interference Sparks Concerns
Abu Qamar expressed surprise over Jenrick’s involvement in her case, calling it part of a broader pattern of politicized decision-making in UK immigration matters. She stated that Jenrick’s intervention “sends a chilling message to activists” advocating for Palestinian rights, suggesting that the government’s actions exemplified a “brutal crackdown” on voices critical of its stance on Israel and Palestine. Her appeal case involved detailed examinations by various agencies, some of which concluded she did not pose a threat, yet her visa was still revoked.
Impact on Palestinian Activism and Human Rights
The ruling has significant implications, as Abu Qamar noted, validating support for Palestinian rights as distinct from extremism. It reinforces the right of individuals to criticize government policies and support human rights issues without facing punitive consequences. “This ruling validates the right to voice support for human rights for the plight of Palestinians and the right to resist occupation,” she said, adding that the decision brought relief to her and supporters of Palestinian causes.
Read More: Palestine hails Spain’s call to halt arms exports to Israel
Abu Qamar has experienced personal tragedy due to the ongoing conflict in Gaza, where she has lost 22 relatives since Israeli airstrikes intensified. Her paternal grandparents were also among those displaced during the 1948 Nakba. She called the situation her family faces in Gaza “hell on Earth” and said the loss was both devastating and a reminder of her advocacy’s purpose.