Three pro-Palestinian activists have been formally acquitted of charges alleging they caused criminal damage to Israeli-made Sodastream products in a Belfast supermarket. The case, which drew attention from both local media and human rights advocates, concluded on Monday at Belfast Magistrates’ Court after the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) offered no evidence against the defendants.

---

Details of the Alleged Incident

The incident reportedly took place in July 2024 at the Sainsbury’s supermarket in the Kennedy Centre, West Belfast. The activists—Martin Rafferty (58) of Carnmoney Road, Newtownabbey, and Eoin Davey (57) and Yasmary Perdomo (50), both of Springfield Road, Belfast—were accused of affixing BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) stickers to Sodastream products.

The BDS movement is a global campaign that calls for economic, cultural, and academic boycotts of Israel and Israeli settlements in the occupied territories.

All three defendants denied the charges and maintained their innocence throughout the lengthy legal proceedings.

---

Court Proceedings and Acquittal

The trial spanned a series of hearings totaling 13 separate sessions since June of last year. On Monday, District Judge Anne Marshall formally dismissed the case after the PPS declined to present evidence.

The defendants’ solicitor, Aiden Carlin, praised the outcome, describing it as “spectacular”. Carlin criticized the prosecution for pursuing the case despite having “literally no evidence of any alleged damage”.

He added:

“It is an injustice that our clients had to come to court multiple times since last June before the PPS offered ‘no evidence’ this morning. We urge the PPS to withdraw similar cases which have been brought against other BDS activists.”

---

Public Prosecution Service Statement

The PPS explained the decision, emphasizing its duty to reassess prosecution cases as new information becomes available:

“Where new information or evidence becomes available, it is considered along with all the existing information and evidence in the case, and the test for prosecution applied, as happened in this case. Following a change in the evidence available in this case, it was determined that the test for prosecution was no longer met.”

The statement highlights the importance of evidence-based prosecution and reflects the PPS’s willingness to withdraw cases when the legal threshold for conviction is not met.

---

Broader Context

This case underscores the legal complexities surrounding activism linked to the BDS movement. While BDS supporters argue their actions are a form of peaceful protest and free expression, authorities in several countries have investigated activists for alleged property damage, trespassing, or disruption.

The acquittal of Rafferty, Davey, and Perdomo may set a precedent for similar cases in Northern Ireland and the UK, reinforcing the need for solid evidence before pursuing legal action against activists.

It also highlights the tension between commercial interests, political activism, and freedom of expression, particularly in contexts involving contentious international conflicts.

---

Reaction from Activist Community

Outside the courtroom, the defendants and supporters celebrated the ruling. Advocates for BDS and Palestinian rights hailed the acquittal as a vindication of peaceful protest, emphasizing the importance of standing against alleged injustices without facing unwarranted criminal charges.

Carlin reiterated the call for authorities to review other pending cases against BDS activists, suggesting that overzealous prosecutions could discourage lawful activism in the future.

---

Key Takeaways

• Three pro-Palestinian activists acquitted of criminal damage in Belfast after PPS offered no evidence.
• The alleged incident involved placing BDS stickers on Israeli-made Sodastream products at a Sainsbury’s supermarket.
• The defendants maintained innocence throughout 13 court hearings.
• Legal experts stress the ruling reinforces evidence-based prosecution standards and the protection of peaceful activism.
• The case draws attention to ongoing debates over the BDS movement, activism, and free expression in the UK and Northern Ireland.