Nonprofits trying to halt exports of fighter jet components to Israel lost a legal challenge in the UK court system.
Court Denies Nonprofits' Challenge to British Arms Exports to Israel
Court Denies Nonprofits' Challenge to British Arms Exports to Israel
UK court rules decision on fighter jet parts sales must rest with the government.
In a significant ruling on June 30, 2025, a British court denied a group of nonprofits' legal bid to prevent the sale of fighter jet parts to Israel, stating that such matters fall under the purview of the government rather than the judiciary. This decision follows a partial suspension of arms sales to Israel last September, where the UK government halted 30 out of 350 licenses after determining that certain military equipment might contribute to severe breaches of international humanitarian law.
However, licenses for components crucial for the multinational F-35 combat aircraft program—which also involves several other nations—were maintained on the grounds that they did not pertain to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. According to the British government, participation in the F-35 program is integral to global security.
Human rights organization Al-Haq from the West Bank, along with the London-based Global Legal Action Network, spearheaded the legal challenge against continued exports of F-35 parts. They received backing from other prominent groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
During the four-day hearing earlier this month, the nonprofits' lawyers argued that providing these components directly violated the UK's responsibilities under international law, particularly the Geneva Conventions. They contended that these arms could potentially be used to perpetrate attacks against civilians.
Despite these arguments, the High Court ruled that its jurisdiction did not extend to adjudicating whether Israel's actions in Gaza constituted genocide or war crimes. The court reiterated that decisions related to the F-35 program should remain within the discretion of government ministers, effectively closing the door on this particular legal avenue for the nonprofits involved.
However, licenses for components crucial for the multinational F-35 combat aircraft program—which also involves several other nations—were maintained on the grounds that they did not pertain to the ongoing conflict in Gaza. According to the British government, participation in the F-35 program is integral to global security.
Human rights organization Al-Haq from the West Bank, along with the London-based Global Legal Action Network, spearheaded the legal challenge against continued exports of F-35 parts. They received backing from other prominent groups, including Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch.
During the four-day hearing earlier this month, the nonprofits' lawyers argued that providing these components directly violated the UK's responsibilities under international law, particularly the Geneva Conventions. They contended that these arms could potentially be used to perpetrate attacks against civilians.
Despite these arguments, the High Court ruled that its jurisdiction did not extend to adjudicating whether Israel's actions in Gaza constituted genocide or war crimes. The court reiterated that decisions related to the F-35 program should remain within the discretion of government ministers, effectively closing the door on this particular legal avenue for the nonprofits involved.
