TEN out of 24 pro-Palestine activists charged over a break-in at an Israeli weapons factory in Bristol have been held in prison for a year without trial.

Eight have been in custody for nine months, with most of the Filton 24 set to be imprisoned for more than two years before trial over the alleged causing £1 million of criminal damage to an Elbit Systems site.

This is well over the pre-trial legal custody time limit of six months, with the defendants, who are aged between 20 and 52, insisting that they meet the legal conditions for bail.

The Filton case has been described by a coalition of 21 human rights law organisations as a litmus test for human rights and democracy in Britain.

Prosecutors have submitted that there is a “terrorist connection” to the cases, despite their alleged offences of August 6 2024 pre-dating the proscription of Palestine Action by more than nine months.

The coalition has urged the government to change the broad definition of terrorism in the Terrorism Act 2000, which can include property damage only, with Amnesty International condemning the “misuse of terrorism legislation” in the case to circumvent activists’ legal protections.

On Saturday, relatives and supporters of the group will gather in the park outside the Imperial War Museum in London for speeches, poems and to show support for their loved ones and for the people of Gaza in the ongoing genocide.

A Filton 24 spokesperson said: “Our lives have been turned upside down by the imprisonment of our loved ones and we miss them constantly. 

“Why does this government value the property of an Israeli arms company, Elbit Systems, over the rights and freedom of its own citizens?”

Former shadow chancellor and MP for Hayes and Harlington John McDonnell said: “I am shocked at the brutal way the Filton campaigners have been treated. 

“I considered the use of anti-terrorist legislation against these protesters when they were arrested inappropriate and wrong, and I have raised this issue in Parliament. 

“I also consider their imprisonment on remand for such a long period unjust, harsh and brutal. 

“There are clear alternatives to prison by ensuring their supervision in the community.

“Serving a long sentence before being even tried cannot be fair, reasonable or even rational.”