Britain's decision to allow the export of F-35 fighter jet components to Israel, despite accepting they could be used in breach of international humanitarian law in Gaza, was lawful, London's High Court ruled on Monday.
Al-Haq, a group based in the West Bank, had taken legal action against Britain's Department for Business and Trade over its decision to exempt F-35 parts when it suspended some arms export licenses last year.
The United Kingdom assessed that Israel was not committed to complying with international humanitarian law, in relation to humanitarian access and the treatment of detainees, in Israel's ongoing military campaign in response to Hamas's October 2023 massacre.
But Britain decided to "carve out" F-35 licenses, with the government saying that suspending those licenses would disrupt a global program that supplies parts for the aircraft, with a knock-on impact on international security.
Any such disruption would "undermine US confidence in the UK and NATO," the Defense Ministry said.
Al-Haq argued at a hearing last month that the decision was unlawful as it was in breach of Britain's obligations under international law, including the Geneva Convention.
But the High Court dismissed the group's challenge, which is believed to be the only legal case in Britain over arms sales to Israel, in a written ruling.
Judges Stephen Males and Karen Steyn said that the case "has not been about whether the UK should supply arms or other military equipment to Israel."
They said the key issue was whether the court could rule that Britain must withdraw from the international F-35 program, which ministers argue is vital to British and international security.
"Under our constitution that acutely sensitive and political issue is a matter for the executive which is democratically accountable to Parliament and ultimately to the electorate, not for the courts," the judges ruled.
It was not immediately clear whether Al-Haq would seek permission to appeal against the judgment.
This is a developing story.