Pro-Palestine Activists Convicted of Criminal Damage at National Gallery
Youth Demand members found guilty after defacing Picasso painting and gallery floor.
Image: Eddie Pollard / AI
Sarah Connor
Two pro-Palestine activists, Jai Halai and Monday-Malachi Rosenfeld, have been found guilty of criminal damage at Southwark Crown Court following an incident at the National Gallery.
Activists from the group Youth Demand plastered a poster of a Gazan mother and child over the glass cover of Picasso's 1901 painting 'Motherhood' on October 9, 2024. They then poured water-based paint onto the wooden flooring of the gallery during their protest.
The National Gallery incurred £250.28 for 'response costs' related to reopening the gallery. An additional £271.59 covered cleaning expenses.
Four workers, charged at £120 an hour for cleaning the floor, contributed significantly to the overall costs. Gallery official Michael Willie confirmed the extent of the damage.
Willie stated, "Paint was on the marble skirting, stanchion, rope barriers, and it was seeping into the sockets." He elaborated on the necessary repairs.
"Just staining in the grains of the marble the mastic joint, we had to replace it in its entirety," Willie noted. He indicated the paint "could be cleaned away enough to reopen the gallery."
The activists denied criminal damage, but a jury convicted them after more than nine hours of deliberation. Judge David Tomlinson released Halai and Rosenfeld on bail, with sentencing scheduled for September.
The protest aimed to highlight the UK's alleged complicity in genocide in Palestine. Protesters claimed "women are giving birth without any medical attention."
Activists also asserted that "Eighty-seven per cent of the public support an arms embargo" on Israel. They advocated for a "democratic revolution."
Eighty-seven per cent of the public support an arms embargo.
Katie McFadden, a gallery representative, described the decision to replace damaged elements as an "aesthetic decision." This ensured the National Gallery kept "looking fancy."
This incident marks another instance of direct action by climate and social justice groups. They increasingly target cultural institutions to draw attention to their causes.
The legal system's response to such protests continues to define the tension between freedom of expression and the protection of public and private property. The conviction of Halai and Rosenfeld sets a clear precedent.
This precedent outlines legal consequences for actions resulting in damage, regardless of the protesters' stated intentions. The ongoing debate surrounding the effectiveness and legality of direct action in public spaces remains a significant point of contention for both activists and authorities.