A Palestinian student has successfully appealed a decision by the Home Office to revoke her student visa due to her comments on the Israel-Gaza conflict. The tribunal found that the Home Office did not provide sufficient evidence to support its claim that Dana Abu Qamar’s presence in the UK was “not conducive to public good.”
Abu Qamar, a 20-year-old law student, had her visa revoked in December 2023 after making remarks during a university demonstration. She spoke about Gaza’s historical resistance to what she described as Israel’s “oppressive regime.” In a subsequent interview with Sky News, she stated, “For 16 years, Gaza has been under blockade, and for the first time they are actively resisting. This is truly a once-in-a-lifetime experience.”
She also expressed the mixed emotions felt by those in Gaza: “We are both in fear of how Israel will retaliate, but we are full of pride and joy about what is happening.”
As the leader of the Friends of Palestine society at the University of Manchester, Abu Qamar argued that her comments were misinterpreted. She emphasized her support for Palestinian resistance to occupation and clarified that she does not condone violence against civilians or support Hamas.
The tribunal ruled that the Home Office’s decision was a “disproportionate interference” with Abu Qamar’s right to free speech, as protected under the European Convention on Human Rights. The judgment stated that her comments did not constitute support for Hamas or the group’s actions during the attacks on October 7.
The tribunal also characterized Abu Qamar as “not an extremist” and noted that her description of Israel as an “apartheid” state aligns with views held by various human rights organizations. The tribunal asserted that her language regarding “actively resisting” and “breaking free” would be understood by knowledgeable observers as referring to lawful acts of Palestinian resistance.
The ruling followed inquiries from Robert Jenrick, a former immigration minister and Conservative leadership candidate, about revoking her visa. In response to the judgment, Abu Qamar told the Guardian, “This ruling validates the right to voice support for human rights and the right to resist occupation.”
She emphasized, “I have never condoned harm to innocent civilians. It doesn’t align with my character or views, and I’m glad the court recognized that.”
Abu Qamar has lost 22 relatives in the ongoing conflict, and her paternal grandparents were displaced during the 1948 Nakba. She described the situation for her relatives in Gaza, where airstrikes have killed at least 43,000 Palestinians, as “hell on Earth.”
Expressing her shock over Jenrick’s intervention, Abu Qamar pointed to a concerning trend of politicization in immigration and security decisions, warning that it “sends a chilling message to activists.”
“The government’s crackdown has been brutal,” she said. “I felt like I was losing everything in one second. And for what? For supporting my people’s right to resist a brutal occupation.”
Related topics:
- Shocking Shooting of Jewish Man in Democrat-Controlled City Sparks Debate on Illegal Immigration Status
- Immigration Uncovered: How Elon Musk Proves Borders Are Wide Open for the Wealthy
- A Bipartisan Breakthrough on U.S. Immigration Could Still Happen
