No tracking. No cookies
Subscriptions
Subscriptions
Support our mission to provide fearless stories about and outside the media system
Packed with exclusive investigations, analysis, and features
Councils are at legal risk if they continue to invest in companies ‘facilitating Israel’s crimes against the Palestinian people’, according to a new legal opinion from lawyers from the Doughty Street Chambers on behalf of the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC).
PSC has now written to Secretary of State Angela Rayner arguing that she too is under a legal obligation to issue guidance to prevent all local Government pension funds investing in companies ‘enabling Israel’s crimes’.
The campaign group has asked for a response from councils within 21 days to outline how they will abide by their legal obligation.
The position paper, first seen by Byline Times, states: “In the face of the almost incalculable devastation caused by Israel’s military assault on Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, it is a moral and legal imperative that all levels of Government take action to bring Israel’s violations of international law to an end.
“One lever the UK has to effect change is by divesting from companies which are aiding or assisting in Israel’s violations of the most fundamental norms of international law.”
Don’t miss a story
It continues: “The UK has a number of ‘prevention and non-assistance duties’ [under in international law]: The UK must not recognise, explicitly or implicitly, situations created by Israel’s serious breaches of peremptory norms [fundamental international law principles. The UK must refrain from rendering aid or assistance to maintaining situations created by Israel’s serious breaches of peremptory norms.
“[And] the UK is required to cooperate with other States, and take all reasonably available measures to bring to an end any violations of peremptory norms by Israel, ensure respect of the Geneva Conventions, and prevent genocide.”
The legal opinion written by leading lawyers today sets out the duties local and central Government have to prevent and end assistance to Israel’s violations of international law, and how those duties apply to investments under the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). Ministers and local Government pension bodies must take action to counter the risk of aiding war crimes and crimes against humanity, according to the legal counsel.
They add: “Administering authorities and the Secretary of State will be at significant legal risk if they continue to invest or permit investment in Involved Companies,” referring to firms allegedly abetting genocide and other crimes in Gaza and the West Bank.
The legal opinion continues: “Administering authorities must take a prudent approach in considering, making inquiries and exercising due diligence to determine whether investments in [war crime-] Involved Companies under the LGPS are contributing to violations of international law in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.”
In the past year, 17 local councils have called for, or committed to, divestment from companies believed to be ‘complicit in Israel’s crimes’, according to PSC. More are expected to follow in light of this new legal opinion.
UK Gaza Families Urge Starmer to Hold Israel Accountable for Press Killings
A group representing 350 Palestinian families living in Britain have called on the PM to condemn Israel’s ‘systematic assault on the press’ and back an inquiry
It comes as PSC launches a new front in its campaigning by issuing legal notices to all councils in England and Wales that administer a LGPS fund, arguing they are under an obligation to take steps to divest from companies alleged to be enabling Israel’s war.
PSC’s research released earlier this year has found that LGPS funds have invested £12.2billion in companies which further Israel’s violations of international law.
That includes substantial investments in companies which are involved in the supply of technology, surveillance equipment and weapons to the Israeli military, and the construction and financing of illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank.
The legal opinion argues Israel is violating fundamental obligations under international law that must be adhered to in all circumstances, such as the prohibition on genocide, the prohibition of racial discrimination and apartheid, and the right to self-determination.
Amid the starvation of Palestinians in Gaza, Israel continues to conduct a massive military assault on Gaza City, where one million people are sheltering, the paper notes.
Israel has also recently approved a large set of illegal settlement expansions in the occupied West Bank that would effectively cut the territory in two, and it is threatening a full annexation of the West Bank. The UK Government has condemned Israel’s actions in Gaza and the West Bank. But the campaigners want sanctions to go much further.
After Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, LGPS funds acted quickly to divest from assets linked to Russia.
Palestine Campaign Group Says It Has Been ‘De-Banked’ by Virgin Money With ‘£10,000 Trapped’
EXCLUSIVE: Greater Manchester Friends of Palestine says their account was frozen without explanation days after Palestine Action was proscribed, preventing aid donations from reaching Gaza
Campaigners now expect that fund managers will follow suit in this case, “given the clear consensus among human rights bodies and experts that Israel is carrying out genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.”
PSC Director Ben Jamal said the legal opinion “puts all councils and the Secretary of State on notice” of a legal imperative to divest from companies “enabling Israel’s atrocities”.
“With Israel violating all norms of, and duties under, international law through its genocide against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and decades of oppression throughout Palestine, now is the time for councils to acknowledge their responsibility and fulfil their legal obligations not to aid or abet Israel’s crimes,” Jamal said.
Despite a rise in councils divesting from Israeli companies, Jamal added: “Many councils are failing to listen to campaigners and pension fund members. We must continue to ramp up the pressure on all councils until they fulfil their obligation to end their investments in companies enabling Israel’s atrocities.”
The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) was contacted for comment.
The legal opinion for PSC was prepared by Max du Plessis S.C., Tatyana Eatwell and Joshua Jackson of Doughty Street Chambers, with the assistance of Deighton Pierce Glynn solicitors.
Local Government Responds
In a statement on the position paper to local Government pension funds, the Board of the Local Government Pension Scheme said: “Although the letter asks for a response within 21 days, the Board believes that it is more important to take the necessary time to consider the arguments made and the appropriate response to them…
“Last year, letters were sent from PSC to funds that made similar allegations. In response the Board commissioned legal advice from Nigel Giffin KC which addressed the issues as they were understood in October 2024. Whilst the latest letter and position paper present more extensive, complex and specialist legal arguments than the earlier letter, they make no reference to the Giffin advice.
“While the principles set out in the earlier advice still hold, we recognise that the situation in Gaza is an evolving one and we need to consider whether, and if so what, further advice it would be helpful to provide funds and who would be best placed to provide that…
“In the meantime, funds may wish to review their Responsible Investment policies in relation to human rights abuses and ensure they are both satisfied with the content of those policies and confident they are being applied effectively in practice.”
The Board said it would seek the views of central Government, as well as its own legal counsel, on what to do next.
ENJOYING THIS ARTICLE? HELP US TO PRODUCE MORE
Receive the monthly Byline Times newspaper and help to support fearless, independent journalism that breaks stories, shapes the agenda and holds power to account.
We’re not funded by a billionaire oligarch or an offshore hedge-fund. We rely on our readers to fund our journalism. If you like what we do, please subscribe.
Divestment Action So Far
In July this year, Cardiff Council voted for a motion expressing in “in strong terms” its view that “it does not wish to be associated with companies potentially complicit in war crimes.”
The motion called on the Cardiff & Vale Pension Fund, and the Wales Pension Partnership, to “review their investments” and consider divesting from companies complicit in war crimes.
Lewisham Council also passed a motion that month calling on its Pensions Investment Committee to “work towards disclosing and divesting” from companies “operating within occupied territories” and those involved in “human rights abuses.” It followed a previous commitment by the Pensions Investment Committee in September 2024.
Last July, a London council’s Islington Pension Fund committed to begin a process to “ensure that companies on the UN’s list of businesses involved in activities in the Occupied Palestinian Territory” are “excluded from the Fund’s investments.” That month Waltham Forest Council’s Pension Fund Committee committed to “update its ethical policy to ensure that the pension fund is divested from companies involved in the arms trade.”
Waltham Forest Council’s Pension Fund Committee commits to actions including to “update its ethical policy to ensure that the pension fund is divested from companies involved in the arms trade.”
See here for a full list of local Government calls for divestment from Israel.
UPDATE 3/9/25: This article initially stated that in August last year, the Universities Superannuation Scheme (USS), the UK’s largest private pension scheme, divested from £80million of Israeli assets including Israeli Government bonds, following pressure from the University and College Union.
USS has got in touch to deny they had excluded Israel from their investment portfolio or made decisions based on campaign pressure. “It is also wrong to state, or imply, that our decisions were made for anything other than financial reasons. They were not made in response to the range of views USS members may have, and nor were they any form of comment on events other than the financial circumstances,” the spokesperson said.
Got a story? Get in touch in confidence on josiah@bylinetimes.com
Subscribers Get More from JOSIAH
Josiah Mortimer also writes the On the Ground column, exclusive to the print edition of Byline Times.
So for more from him…
