Banksy’s latest mural outside London’s Royal Courts of Justice sparks controversy and immediate removal plans

A new mural by Banksy depicting a judge striking a protester has appeared outside London’s historic Royal Courts of Justice, igniting debate over free speech, heritage preservation, and political activism amid government crackdowns on dissent.

A new mural by the elusive British street artist Banksy has appeared on a wall outside London’s Royal Courts of Justice, sparking immediate controversy and plans for its removal due to the historical significance of the building. The artwork depicts a judge, dressed in traditional wig and gown, violently striking an unarmed protester with a gavel. The protester lies on the ground clutching a blood-stained placard, an image widely interpreted as a stark commentary on the suppression of dissent. Banksy confirmed his authorship by posting a photo of the mural on Instagram, his usual method of authenticating new work.

Authorities swiftly covered the mural with black plastic sheets and placed metal barriers around the site, under the watch of security officers and a camera. The Royal Courts of Justice, housed in a Victorian gothic revival building completed 143 years ago, is a listed structure, protected by law to preserve its original character. HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) stated that the mural must be removed “with consideration for its historical significance,” highlighting the legal obligation to maintain the integrity of such historic sites.

Although the mural does not directly reference a specific event, it is widely seen as a response to recent political tensions surrounding the UK government’s ban on the group Palestine Action. This organization was designated a terrorist group after some of its members vandalised a Royal Air Force base. Over the weekend, nearly 900 people were arrested at a London protest opposing this ban. Activists, including the group Defend Our Juries which organised the protest, have praised the mural for its powerful depiction of governmental suppression. Their statement noted, “When the law is used as a tool to crush civil liberties, it does not extinguish dissent, it strengthens it.”

The judiciary has already been involved in the legal battles related to Palestine Action, initially rejecting their request to appeal the ban before a High Court judge later allowed the appeal to proceed, a decision currently being challenged by the government.

Banksy began his career spray painting in Bristol before gaining worldwide fame for his politically charged works that frequently critique government policies on migration, war, and civil rights. His murals often appear suddenly and disappear just as quickly, sometimes removed by authorities or stolen, further adding to the mystique surrounding his art.

Previous political statements from Banksy include a 2019 mural in Venice portraying a shipwrecked child holding a pink smoke bomb, and artworks in Paris and the occupied Palestinian territories addressing themes of migration, conflict, and human rights. Notably, he also designed the “Walled Off Hotel” in Bethlehem, a politically themed guesthouse which closed in October 2023.

Banksy’s presence remains an unmistakable and provocative force in public spaces. Last summer, for instance, a series of animal-themed murals appeared throughout London, capturing public imagination before disappearing just as mysteriously. His ability to intertwine art with activism continues to provoke debate on the role of street art in social and political discourse.

The rapid removal plan for the latest mural underscores the tension between protecting historic sites and engaging with contemporary political dialogue through street art. Meanwhile, the government’s tough stance on protests linked to Palestine Action adds further layers to the mural’s interpretation and public reception.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
10

Notes:
The narrative is current, with the mural’s appearance and subsequent coverage occurring within the past 24 hours. The earliest known publication date is September 8, 2025. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No earlier versions with differing figures, dates, or quotes were found. The article includes updated data and does not recycle older material. No content was republished across low-quality sites or clickbait networks. No similar narratives appeared more than 7 days earlier. The update justifies a higher freshness score and should be flagged.

Quotes check

Score:
10

Notes:
The direct quotes from Banksy and HM Courts and Tribunals Service are unique to this report. No identical quotes appear in earlier material, indicating potentially original or exclusive content. No variations in quote wording were found.

Source reliability

Score:
10

Notes:
The narrative originates from reputable organisations, including the Associated Press and Reuters, enhancing its credibility. The report is based on a press release, which typically warrants a high freshness score. No unverifiable entities are mentioned.

Plausability check

Score:
10

Notes:
The claims about the mural’s appearance, its content, and the authorities’ response are consistent with recent online information. The narrative is covered by multiple reputable outlets, including the Associated Press and Reuters. The report includes specific factual anchors, such as the date of the mural’s appearance and the location of the Royal Courts of Justice. The language and tone are consistent with the region and topic. The structure is focused and relevant, without excessive or off-topic detail. The tone is appropriate for a news report, neither unusually dramatic nor vague.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH

Summary:
The narrative is current, original, and sourced from reputable organisations. It provides specific factual anchors and is consistent with recent information. No credibility risks were identified.