That is to say, yes, the terrorism connection absolutely increases the severity of the sentence.

There's no such thing as "severity of the sentence". They got the minimal possible sentence for criminal damage. The sentence was not increased in any way by the aggravating factor. Is was the minimal possible.

On top of that, since the jury were unaware that this was being considered, and not allowed to consider motivations in their verdict, there seems to be a fundamental rupture in the process of natural justice.

As with "severity of the sentence" you don't know what you're talking about. That's not how any of it works.

The terrorist connection aggravating factor can be applied if the damage is over 5k. Even if 200k is exaggerated I don't think providing the real number would help them.

Where in my comment did I say I agree or disagree with any of it?

terrorism has a meaning, and is not dependent on amounts of property damage.

If you would understand my comment you would realize that is pretty much exactly what I said.

So splitting the legal hairs here is at best irrelevant. We live in a society not a courtroom. The government has slapped The Big Scary Word on a thing it shouldn’t have.

I think it is important to to know what's happening and not just repeat narrative coming from one side. People argued with me that "terrorist connection" means people are being convicted of additional crimes without the knowledge of a jury. Now you're claiming the government is calling them terrorists while the "terrorist organization" proscription for Palestine Action was upheld by Court of Appeals. Palestine Action is using the threat of serious damage to property to intimidate people and advance ideological cause. They are publishing a "target map: https://targetmap.org/map. This is pretty much the definition of a terrorist organization according to UK laws.

We all would like UK government to sanction Israel but few governments in the world are willing to do that. Groups like Palestine Action try to change the status quo by committing crimes.I don't think terrorist organization proscription is an overreach by the government here. I think that instead of being intimidated by it we should admit that yes, in this case, we do support the terrorist.

INAL but I think that's why they are not being charged with terrorism, only terrorist connection is applied.

I may be wrong but https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/58-01/129/5801129en.pdf

""" offence found to have a terrorist connection by definition in new sub-paragraph (3E), the offender will be subject to the release provisions in section 247A of the 2003 Act (for extended sentences for offences which carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment, release will be at the end of the full custodial term; for all other sentences release will be at the discretion of the Parole Board from the two-thirds point of the custodial term)."""

So I believe what "terrorist connection" aggravating factor does for conviction in crimes like property damage is that you can apply for parole after 2/3 of the full sentence. From what I read it definitely doesn't extend the sentence - the maximum sentence is still the same as maximum sentence for property damage. Not sure if the judge is forced to apply maximum sentence or not if terrorist connection is found. Can't find any info on that.

EDIT: I read the sentencing and minimum sentence is not affected, just the parole conditions.