Click here for the video version.

On a yearly basis, the United Kingdom spends over 65 billion pounds on imports from one of the most powerful nations on this planet. That country has been committing a genocide on Muslim people for decades. That country would not be able to eradicate its Muslim population without the help of countries like the UK. This is a country that used to be a colony of the British empire. I am, as you might be aware, talking about the Uyghur genocide, as committed by China.

The United Kingdom is complicit in the concentration camp slave labour, in the forced sterilisations, in the breaking up of families, in the torture and killings of the Uyghur people.

The United Nations Security Council issued a report on the export of British weapons being used to commit genocide in another part of the world. Since 2023, over 12 million people have been uprooted, and while David Lammy dares to attack the world governments for looking away from yet another genocide, the British government keeps supplying weapons to their former colony. We have all heard the stories of rape, torture and mass slaughter. At the International Court of Justice, Sudan's minister of Justice declared that the Sudanese genocide would not have been possible without the complicity of the United Kingdom.

And here I am, after half a year imprisonment, on trial for daring to say: "Stop the genocide."

The formerly state-owned oil company BP, famous worldwide for their oil spills and claims on gas fields in disputed areas, have been a major factor in the genocide in West-Papua, which is a benefit to the British treasure chest that could almost compensate for the economic losses of Brexit. That profit might explain the military and financial support Britain provides to Jakartan armed forces.

There are more genocides the UK are complicit in, and that's just the present. I don't want to talk about the role of the zionist war criminal whose statue I used as a canvas for this message, but his leading role in the Bengal famine is infamous, and his white supremacism is well-documented, like how in 1937, he infamously told the Royal Commission: "that a stronger race, a higher-grade race, a more worldly wise race to put it that way, has come in and taken their place." In 2002, this racist, antisemitic, islamophobic, massmurdering, demagogue in a three piece suit was somehow declared the Greatest Briton by the BBC. I will not speak of him again, as he is not important, and his statue has no value other than being a billboard placed in front of parliament, ideal for any message directed at the regime ruling over this country. I understand using it as such is a proud tradition in this country, and I hope it gets used like that until the day the people tear it down.

There is one more genocide I must mention when I explain why I was compelled to speak out against genocide, and that is the one the British aren't just complicit in, but the one that they are actively executing on UK soil. The weapons used in that genocide are products of British members of the Epstein class, like prince Andrew, Richard Dawkins and J.K. Rowling. I am speaking, of course, of the genocide on transgendered people in the United Kingdom. Your neighbours, your peers, your family members have seen their rights taken away in a much faster pace than their cis compatriots, leading to the erasure of queer culture and history, the loss of women's rights and an undeniable spike in the number of teenage suicides.

The British empire has never stopped its atrocities against humankind, but while in its colonial glory days it used to enrich the citizens at home, for the last couple of decades it has replaced human rights with fascist-like authoritarianism, hacking away at the two forces that used to control democracy: the free press and the right to protest. Since July 2025, almost four thousand arrests have been made under the ludicrous Terrorism Act. My friends in the Netherlands would tell each other: come to the UK, so you can get your terrorist diploma!

On the 27th of February, I was arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated criminal damage and terrorism. I was surprised only by the 'racially aggravated' part, but it was explained to me that the use of the word 'infidel' is considered antisemitic.

I had not used the word 'infidel', but that didn't seem to bother my arresting officer.

What I had written was: globalise the intifada. Intifada is a word that means 'shaking off', and is used as a metaphor for uprising, or rebellion. In a previous court session I got the chance to explain what the phrase globalise the intifada means to me: it's a message about taking care of each other, of rebuilding a world that has been destroyed by the enemies of the people who are currently in power. It means to love and to rage in defiance of destruction. It is a call to action for all who have been beaten down, to rise up and to build a better world. It bares a lot of similarities to the international solidarity the communists of the 20th century were aiming for, and embraces the principles that a language like Esperanto, or projects like Wikipedia are built upon. Globalising the intifada means acknowledging our common struggle, and fighting for global justice and freedom for all.

To call that racism is akin to calling a retired nurse holding a sign in silence a terrorist.

To call that antisemitism is pissing on the graves of holocaust victims.

You shouldn't be surprised to hear the police chose to drop the 'racially aggravated' part, probably after reading a dictionary.

The 'terrorism' charge was because I was dressed in a striking red boiler suit, which happened to have the text 'I support Palestine Action' on the back. "In the UK it's a crime to say: I support Palestine Action." Due to the crown's definition of terrorism, the average terrorist in this country is now a 59 year old white woman. I don't fit that profile, so the police had to take that back as well. "No Further Action," they said, because they believed prosecution for that would just make them look silly. They kept my boiler suit as evidence, though.

In fact, they haven't given me back anything they took from me on arrest. They seized about 500 pounds worth of possessions from me, including my ring. I miss that ring. It was given to me by a very close friend who isn't with me anymore, and it might have been the last material thing I ever valued. The police have told me they lost it. I'm actually very sad about that.

But that's not what we're here for. That's just the London Met being bad at their jobs. To summarise: after all that, the only charge that stuck was criminal damage. And now that you've heard a lot of people talk about that, it's up to you to decide whether I deserve to be punished for that.

I have pleaded not guilty to the charge. I'm pretty sure that plea has no legal value whatsoever, as I was, by then, never told what I was charged with in a language I understood. In this case, up until Tuesday, my right to an interpreter has effectively been denied at every police station, in every prison and in every hearing at every court. I must be grateful for the attempts made by this court – and I appreciate the irony of me ending all this in English anyway.

But as I now understand, I have pleaded not guilty, and I'm glad I did, because I don't think I'm guilty of criminal damage. Sure, I spraypainted a message to parliament on a huge and well-lit billboard in front of parliament, there's no denying that. That's basically the definition of a peaceful protest: I was in sight and sound of my target, left a political message that could not have been clearer, didn't harm anyone doing so. I have made dozens of well-documented attempts at trying to reach the British government in other ways before I resorted to the only one they ever reacted to. As any lawyer familiar with human rights will tell you, this is a textbook case of a peaceful protest. I can't rely on that as a defence, but the fact that it was a protest and that it was peaceful hasn't been disputed in this court.

I'm not saying people who send letters should stop doing that, but if your representatives in whatever government you're aiming for aren't listening, a splash of graffiti is the way to go. If you know about protest law, you know you have to do that in sight and sound of your target. This is why Parliament Square, as the Greater London Authority acknowledged on Wednesday, is the designated spot for protesting the government in this country.

If graffiti doesn't get you an answer, you can always block roads, throw soup at paintings or find more creative ways to peacefully disrupt the system enough to make it impossible to be ignored. After all, in a democracy, it's your legal and moral duty to hold politicians accountable.

It's also your legal and moral duty, and theirs as well, to do everything within your power to prevent or stop genocide. The Genocide Convention compels every citizen of every country that has signed it, to do so. In UK Law this was made law in 1969 as The Genocide Act, which was superseded in 2001 by the International Criminal Court Act. The Coroners and Justice Act 2009 made it so that prosecutions can be taken against anyone within UK borders. Article 3 of the Genocide Convention lists 'Complicity in genocide' as one of five prohibited acts.

In the last couple of days, I've heard both judge and prosecutor speak in a way that made it clear that in no way they're disputing the fact that a genocide is happening in what they referred to as Gaza. At the start of this statement, I've described four other genocides, and although I haven't mentioned the country's name yet, you must understand the point: the British government is complicit in the genocide committed by Israel in occupied Palestine.

By not prosecuting every politician who is complicit in genocide, the British state is in direct violation of the Genocide Convention and the domestic law, the British law, that upholds it.

In fact, anyone who doesn't oppose genocide, actively, is in violation of the Genocide Convention.

But instead of prosecuting the people who are actively and willingly assisting in the deaths and displacement of hundreds of thousands, of millions, the crown tries to hammer down the ones who rise up against genocide. Dozens, if not hundreds of ordinary people like you and I are now behind bars for having saved lives. It's a bloody shame that my learned friend isn't prosecuting the likes of Keir Starmer and Andy Burnham.

The Greater London Authority have told you how many people, tourists and graffiti artists alike, touch the statues in this city in a way that will require some public funding to restore the statues in their original glory. I've seen this city, it's one of the biggest ones in the world, and there's graffiti everywhere. From the way the witness described it, graffiti is clearly understood to be a common and ordinary thing, not something you need a jury for. So I must conclude that I am on trial, here, because of the message, not the graffiti. I said: "Stop the genocide". I said: "Free Palestine!"

I've been held captive for over 6 months, with no access to the healthcare I need, my income taken away from me. I've been denied the right to vote, the right to represent myself in court, and most of the human rights I'm aware of, have been violated while I was in prison. I've been discriminated against for being a foreigner and for my beliefs. I was denied access to the law. I was denied food. I was denied medical attention. This may sound unbelievable, but this is common in prisons in England and Wales, where over 70 thousand innocent people per year are locked up. The people who have done this to me, are colleagues of the person who will sentence me if you convict me.

We have recently seen that four activists who were convicted of criminal damage, were sentenced for terrorism. They had never been charged with terrorism, the jury didn't convict them of terrorism, they never had a chance to defend themselves against the thing they weren't charged for, but a judge decided on his own to sentence them for something they weren't guilty of.

One of their lawyers was accused of contempt of court for informing the jury the fact that, in British law, since 1670, jurors have the absolute right to acquit a person on the basis of their conscience.

Those four people are among the bravest and most decent of all people, and are part of a small, but ever-growing group of direct actionists. They are the ones who uphold the Genocide Convention. But somehow, supporting them is considered a crime more serious than murder or rape in this country.

You have seen the evidence and heard me describe that I have spraypainted words like 'Globalise the Intifada' and 'Never again is now' on that monstrous statue in February. I've never denied that, because I think it's the right thing to do. I think speaking out against injustice, without harming anyone, can't be anything else than the right thing to do. It will be up to you, my peers, my equals, to judge whether that was criminal damage. It'll be up to the judge, if you convict me, to decide whether the punishment I've already received for it before this trial has been enough already.

But if you ask me, the only crime I should be considered guilty of, is not doing enough. I consider myself a coward for just doing a bit of symbolic action, instead of actually sabotaging the war machine. I am well aware of the potential of direct action, I know the science and the history behind it, I know it is what I should do, I know it's what we all should do, and yet, I tell people I'm not aggressive enough to break into a weapons' factory and dismantle the drones used to kill children, so I keep sitting down in silence holding signs, or once in a while, I send a letter to the government to the only inbox they seem to ever look at.

And the thing is: it doesn't make any sense for me to reduce my actions to this. I should've done more. I knew I was risking my freedom when I climbed that statue, and every time I think of what I could have done instead of being imprisoned for half a year, I think by myself: what a waste. If I'm punished like this anyway, I could've, no, I should've done something more spectacular. When your enemy is a genocidal, antidemocratic regime, you shouldn't just hold signs and spray paint. You should burn weapons' factories to the ground, like Earthquake Faction did in the Czech Republic.

I just spraypainted a statue bloody red.

One day, your grandchildren will read about the Uyghurs, about the Sudanese, about how the people of your time treated women and queer people. One day, they will learn about Palestine, the same way we were taught about the atrocities of the Second World War. And they will ask their grandparents: what were you doing, when your leaders used your taxes not to feed the poor, not to house the homeless, but to exterminate an entire people?

I know what I will tell them:

I wasn't doing enough.

But at least I did something.