Application to issue summons against dual British Israeli national dismissed as “politically motivated” and “vexatious”

A pro-Palestinian legal organisation has failed in its attempt to bring a private prosecution against a dual British-Israeli national who returned to Israel on 8 October 2023 to rejoin his army unit as a reservist.

Senior District Judge Paul Goldspring at the Westminster Magistrates’ Court refused an application by the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians (ICJP) to issue a summons under the Foreign Enlistment Act of 1870 (FEA).

ICJP had earlier claimed that it had gathered evidence against more than 10 British citizens.

In an excoriating judgment, ICJP’s application was held to be “an abuse of the process of the court, driven by an improper motive and facilitated by serious breaches of the duty of candour.”  It was also “legally flawed, evidentially deficient, and procedurally defective.”

The judge held that the “dominant motive” behind ICJP’s application was “the advancement of a political and ideological agenda, not the pursuit of justice for a specific criminal act.” The judge concluded that ICJP’s “use of the criminal courts as a platform for political posturing” was “an abuse of process.”

The legislation invoked by ICJP was enacted in the Victorian era to prevent British nationals from being deployed as mercenaries across the globe. But the court held that the FEA, properly interpreted, does not apply at all to a dual national serving in the armed forces of his other country.

ICJP argued that the term “British subject” now means any Commonwealth citizen. However, the Court dismissed this as “an absurd overreach that would criminalise, for example, Indian or Pakistani Commonwealth citizens enlisting in their own national armies.”

Another point on which the case failed was that the enlistment must be “without the license of Her Majesty” for it to constitute an offence. But successive UK governments have explicitly stated in parliament that the FEA does not apply to British nationals serving in the IDF. The court considered that “these statements  constitute the functional equivalent of a license  from Her Majesty”.

ICJP also argued that the reservist had enlisted in the IDF when he returned to Israel on 8 October 2023 from a short visit to Britain, but the court found that he was already serving as a reservist in the IDF and there was no evidence showing that the requirements of the legislation were met when he originally enlisted.

A central requirement of the offence under the FEA is that the accused enlists in a foreign state “at war” with a state at peace with the British sovereign. The Court held that an armed conflict is not necessarily a war for this purpose, and this is a matter to be determined by the UK government, not the court. There was no evidence that the UK government had determined that any of the states identified by ICJP was at war with Israel or at peace with the British sovereign.

Perhaps most strikingly, the Court identified “profound and serious” breaches of the duty of candour owed by a private prosecutor. ICJP had withheld information from the court and failed to disclose accurately the UK Government’s position allowing dual national British-Israelis to serve in the IDF.

ICJP also failed to disclose Crown Prosecution Service guidance reflecting that position and its own prior attempts to involve the Metropolitan Police.

Furthermore, the court considered that ICJP had failed to disclose the close connections between itself and its solicitors, Bindmans. Tayab Ali, who holds a senior role at Bindmans as Deputy Managing Partner, is also a director of ICJP.  Sir Geoffrey Bindman, founder of Bindmans LLP, held a role on the Advisory Board of ICJP until his recent death. The judge said: “failing to disclose these links is a serious breach of the duty owed to the court.”

One of ICJP’S expert witnesses, Dr Mandy Turner, was found not to be independent.  The Judge said: “Dr Turner’s involvement in an ICJP WhatsApp group, combined with her public statements and social media activity, reveals her to be a campaigner and activist committed to the political agenda pursued by this prosecution, rather than an independent expert.” He found her evidence was “partisan and misleading”.

The judge found that all these examples of withholding of information by ICJP constituted “serious and inexcusable breaches of the duty of candour.”

The judgment contains a clear warning against the misuse of criminal proceedings for political purposes. The Court emphasised that magistrates’ courts must not be used as platforms to “expose” individuals or advance political campaigns, particularly in matters of significant geopolitical sensitivity.

The respondent was represented by Daniel Berke of 3D Solicitors and barristers Peter Wright KC and Natasha Hausdorff.

A spokesperson for UK Lawyer for Israel commented:

“This judgment provides important reassurance for British-Israeli nationals who serve in the IDF, particularly reservists who return to duty in times of crisis. The Court has made clear that such individuals are not to be treated as having unlawfully enlisted in the armed forces of a foreign state.

It also sends a strong message that misuse of the criminal law to advance a political agenda will not be countenanced by English courts.

We are very grateful to our brilliant colleagues Natasha Hausdorff and Dan Berke, as well as leading counsel Peter Wright KC, who provided excellent representation ensuring that justice has been done.”

The full Judgment is here: ICJP v A Judgment 8.4.26

Daniel Berke is also a director of the association UK Lawyers for Israel.

Natasha Hausdorff also serves as legal director of UKLFI Charitable Trust. Ms Hausdorff was accorded the honour of lighting a torch on Mount Herzl in Jerusalem to mark Israel’s Independence Day in 2025.

Statements by UK government ministers in Parliament

1. In 2014, the UK Government stated publicly that it did not consider that the terms of section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 (the 1870 Act) applied to British citizens serving in the IDF.

“The UK government is extremely concerned about the conflict in Gaza, and is doing everything possible to support a lasting negotiated ceasefire. The Middle East Peace Process continues to be one of our principal foreign policy priorities. Section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 makes it an offence for a British subject to enlist in the military of a foreign state at war with another foreign state with which the UK is at peace. That prohibition does not extend, however, to enlistment in a foreign government’s forces which are engaged in a civil war or combating terrorism or internal uprisings. The Occupied Palestinian Territories are not currently recognised as a state by the UK. Israel has taken military action against individuals and groups within Gaza but has not made a declaration of war. In these circumstances the 1870 Act would not apply.”[1]

2. The 2014 statement was confirmed in January 2024 by Andrew Mitchell MP on behalf of the FCDO:

“Section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 makes it an offence for a British subject to enlist in the military of a foreign state at war with another foreign state with which the UK is at peace. That prohibition does not extend, however, to enlistment in a foreign government’s forces which are engaged in a civil war or combating terrorism or internal uprisings. The Occupied Palestinian Territories are not currently recognised as a state by the UK. It is the UK government’s longstanding position that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and that Israel is an occupying power under that convention. The 1870 Act therefore does not apply in this instance.”[2]

3. In April 2024, the Government made express reference to the IDF in response to a question in the House of Lords:

“The UK recognises the right of British nationals with more than one nationality to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of their additional nationalities. This includes the Israel Defence Force.

With respect to the current conflict in Gaza, Section 4 of the Foreign Enlistment Act 1870 makes it an offence for a British subject to enlist in the military of a foreign state at war with another foreign state with which the UK is at peace. That prohibition does not extend, however, to enlistment in a foreign government’s forces which are engaged in a civil war or combating terrorism or internal uprisings. The Occupied Palestinian Territories are not currently recognised as a state by the UK. The 1870 Act therefore does not apply in this instance.”[3]

This was in response to the question: “To ask His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of British nationals travelling to Israel to fight in the Israel Defence Forces.”

4. The most recent example appears to be in response to a question posed by Ayoub Khan MP: “To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department monitors the involvement of UK-Israeli dual nationals serving in the Israel Defense Forces”. This was answered on 24 June 2025 by Luke Pollard MP (Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces) as follows:

 “The UK recognises the right of British dual nationals to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of the country of their other nationality. We do not track the number of dual nationals that choose to take up this right.

The Secretary of State for Defence has not discussed the issue of UK-Israeli dual nationals serving in the Israel Defense Forces with the Secretary of State for the Home Department.”[4]

5. The position has been consistent. The question asked by Afzal Khan MP: “To ask the Minister of State, Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office, whether he has made an estimate of the number of British nationals that have fought alongside the Israeli Defence Force in each of the last ten years” was answered by Mr Andrew Mitchell MP on behalf of the FCDO on 22 December 2023 as follows:

“We are aware of reports of UK citizens travelling to fight for the Israel Defence Force (IDF), but the Government does not estimate the numbers of those who have done so. The UK recognises the right of British nationals with additional nationalities to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of the country of their other nationalities. The IDF is a recognised armed force and British nationals are both able to volunteer into the IDF and eligible for national service. For Israel, one does not have to be Israeli to serve in the IDF.”[5]

6. The question posed by Baroness Warsi as follows: “to ask His Majesty’s Government how many British or dual British nationals are currently serving in the Israel Defence Forces” was answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Minister of State at the FCDO) on 12 April 2024:

“We are aware of reports of UK citizens travelling to fight for the Israel Defence Force (IDF), but the Government does not estimate the numbers of those who have done so. The UK recognises the right of British nationals with more than one nationality to serve in the legitimately recognised armed forces of their additional nationalities.”[6]

[1] The UK Government’s statement on service in the IDF was made in response to a petition to the UK Government (which gathered 13,617 signatures) entitled, “British citizens who fight in the Israeli army to face criminal prosecution on their return to UK” (2014). The preamble to the petition was as follows: “British citizen are going Israel to fight in the IDF (Israeli defence force) on occupied territories. Anybody who has broken the fourth protocol of the Geneva Convention deserves to face justice in court for their crimes. It is also a crime under British law for a British nationals to serve in a foreign army under the ‘Foreign Enlistment Act 1870’ making it a criminal offence. These individuals need to be arrested and face prosecution in British courts on their return to the UK.” See here: https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/67893

[2]  https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-01-09/8748

[3] https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-03-27/hl3704

[4] https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2025-06-16/60377

[5] https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2023-12-13/6895/

[6] https://questions-statements.parliament.uk/written-questions/detail/2024-03-27/HL3705/; See also https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/uk-confirms-citizens-can-legally-serve-in-israeli-forces/.