The hearing for Al-Haq’s challenge to the sale of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel is due to commence on 13 May, instead of 12 May as originally listed.

Al-Haq is a Palestinian human rights organisation challenging the government’s decision to continue granting licences to sell F-35 fighter jet components and other weapons to Israel.

On 2 September 2024, the government decided to suspend exports of certain weapons to Israel, following its conclusion that Israel was not committed to complying with international humanitarian law in Gaza, and that there was a clear risk that military equipment might be used by Israel to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian law in Gaza. However, it decided to continue to export F-35 fighter jet components.

F-35s have been described as the most lethal fighter jets in the world.  They have been used extensively by Israel in its ongoing attacks in Gaza, having been modified by Israel to carry and drop very large ordnance.

The government accepts that continuing to export F-35 components breaches its own policy on weapons sales but maintains that it has good reason to do so, because suspending the licences is likely to cause significant disruption to the F-35 programme, which would have a critical impact on international peace and security.

Al-Haq argues that this decision is unlawful in a number of respects. In particular, it argues that the Secretary of State for Business and Trade (Jonathan Reynolds) has misdirected himself that the decision is compliant with international and domestic law, that the decision is outside the government’s powers because of the significant risk that it facilitates crime, that the government has taken an irrational approach to assessing the consequences of suspending the licences, that the government has no good reason to depart from its own policy on weapons sales and that it has exercised its discretion in relation to other weapons sales in an irrational way.

Both sides have now exchanged skeleton arguments in preparation for the hearing.

Alice Hardy, partner in the Public Law and Human Rights team at Bindmans representing Al-Haq, said:

The government’s position remains that it does not consider that Israel is committed to complying with international humanitarian law and that there is a clear risk that weapons sold to Israel may be used to commit violations of international humanitarian law. Israel’s reliance on F-35s in its assaults on Gaza is extensive and well-known, with Israel recently receiving new F-35s and placing orders for more. As the UK is the sole supplier of critical parts to F-35 jets, it follows that every new F-35 jet will include UK parts. The government therefore knows that British components are likely to be used in the commission of these violations but has decided to continue exporting them nevertheless. Al-Haq challenges the lawfulness of that decision.

Al-Haq has relaunched their crowdfunder to raise funds for this case, which can be found here.

Al-Haq is represented by Dearbhla Minogue, Charlotte Andrews-Briscoe, Jennine Walker, George Collecott and Sicelo Ngwenya at the Global Legal Action Network, supervised by Alice Hardy at Bindmans. Their counsel team comprises Phillippa Kaufman KC, Raza Hussain KC, Blinne Ni Ghralaigh KC and Eleanor Mitchell of Matrix Chambers, Zac Sammour and Aliya Al-Yassin of 11 Kings Bench Walk, Admas Habteslasie of Landmark Chambers, Catherine Drummond of Three Verulam Buildings, Rayan Fakhoury and Aislinn Kelly-Lyth of Blackstone Chambers, Jagoda Klimowicz of Brick Court Chambers, Mira Hammad of Garden Court North, Courtney Grafton at 20 Essex Chambers, and Rebecca Brown of 2 Temple Gardens.