5G Legal Action - Help us secure a safer future

by actionagainst5g.org

5G Legal Action - Help us secure a safer future

by actionagainst5g.org
Case Owner
We are individuals supported by many people nationwide from all walks of life including doctors and scientists.
days to go
pledged of £150,000 stretch target from 2,772 pledges
Pledge now
Case Owner
We are individuals supported by many people nationwide from all walks of life including doctors and scientists.
Pledge now

This case is raising funds for its stretch target. Your pledge will be collected within the next 24-48 hours (and it only takes two minutes to pledge!)

Latest: Sept. 3, 2020

Our legal case

Nothing should be more important to a responsible government than the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. But what do we have here? We have a government that admits that 5G is being tested by its d…

Read more

The government's actions in authorising 5G are a breach of human rights. We are challenging the government to stop its unlawful action in failing to protect the public from the health risks from 5G technology which we all face through its rapid deployment.  

The government has thus far failed to:

  • take into account the extensive evidence showing that radiofrequency radiation from masts and wireless devices puts health and life at risk 
  • carry out a full and independent examination of the risks 
  • properly inform the public of the dangers so we can decide how to protect ourselves 


  • the government continues to adopt guidelines which the independent scientific research shows is unsafe for humans, animals, and the environment                                

Why does this case matter?

1) 5G will add significantly to the emissions we already have from mobile phone masts, mobile phones, Wi-Fi, wearable devices, smart meters, and other ‘smart’ devices.

2) This issue concerns all citizens.

3) The consequence of inaction could be serious and irreversible damage.

Who we are

We are individuals supported by many from all walks of life including doctors, scientists and engineers. We have joined forces with a strong team of lawyers headed by Michael Mansfield QC. Michael Mansfield has represented the families in the Grenfell Tower, Lockerbie, Hillsborough, Ballymurphy Massacre and Stephen Lawrence cases.

What are we aiming to achieve

Before 5G can be imposed on us all with potentially devastating effects on our health and the environment, we need:

  • Proper independent reviews of all research into the health risks, and reviews of the science concerning the potential environmental impact
  • An informed debate on the consequences of imposing 5G technology on humans and the environment
  • A comprehensive environmental risk assessment examining the potential effects of 5G
  • New guidance on, and regulation and monitoring of, the levels necessary to protect the public and biological life

Why do we want this?

The guidelines adopted by the government are not fit for purpose and are not safe. There is already a substantial body of evidence demonstrating that existing radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health. Currently, Public Health England sanctions limits which are orders of magnitude higher than in other countries.

People have a right to be informed about the risks and what they will be exposed to. There should also be a choice to opt out, particularly for children and other vulnerable groups.

We are not against the progression of technology but we do not consent to the imposition of technology at the risk of harming our health and potentially all biological life. 

Exposure to radiofrequency radiation has been named as a future 'high impact risk' by Swiss Re. In their information to shareholders, telecommunications companies warn about potential loss of share value due to future litigation related to harm to health.

What is the next step in the case?

We have issued a letter before action to the Government. The next step is to apply to the High Court for permission to argue the case in full. 


We need your help because this is a very large case for individuals to take on personally, and we need funding to pursue the claim, both for legal fees and costs. Our initial target of £50,000 will enable us to initiate the judicial review process after which we will continue to our stretch target that may be necessary to pay the costs of the Defendants should the case be lost or be appealed. 

We are so grateful to you for reading this. Please pledge a donation if you can and share this page with your family, friends, colleagues and communities. This case has the potential to affect everyone, both in the UK and globally. 

Please see our website actionagainst5g.org which includes links to peer reviewed science on health, wildlife and the environment.

Thank you       

Recent contributions

Be a promoter

Your share on Facebook could raise £26 for the case

I'll share on Facebook
Update 4


Sept. 3, 2020

Our legal case

Nothing should be more important to a responsible government than the safety and wellbeing of its citizens. But what do we have here? We have a government that admits that 5G is being tested by its deployment in ‘testbeds’ while contending that the increased radiation ‘should’ have no consequences for public health. ‘Should’ denotes no certainty. It signifies there are questions remaining. 

The word ‘should’ is not appropriate when discussing health and safety. The government ‘should’ follow due process but it is not doing so. 

The independent science has already shown that mobile radiation from masts and devices causes biological harm, including ‘clear evidence’ of cancer. The addition of 5G to the mix means both another layer of radiation on top of already toxic levels, in the form of low-frequency 5G, and new frequencies which have not been adequately tested, but which existing studies show can cause health issues. 

We are litigating this issue. Our case against the UK government is that due process is not being followed, that the risks are being entirely disregarded. This is a national public health issue. 

Dismissed by successive governments, the risk to health and safety is current, ongoing and will get worse. 

Before we move towards the government’s ‘ambition’ to turn our existence into an ‘Internet of Things’, the need is urgent for a robust and thorough examination of the health repercussions. 

Imposing 5G on an unsuspecting population amounts to an experiment when questions remain on the consequences to human health. Adopting a position of apparent ignorance is not excusable, it is indefensible when thousands of doctors and scientists have provided evidence of harm and signed countless appeals. Quite apart from the fact that the ICNIRP ‘guidance’ omits any reference to environmental or animal safety, here is a shortened version of the 1947 Nuremberg Code which states: 

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. 

This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. 

The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity. 

2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature. 

4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury. 

5. No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects. 

6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment. 

7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death. 

8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment. 

9. During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end, if he has reached the physical or mental state, where continuation of the experiment seemed to him to be impossible. 

10. During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill and careful judgment required of him, that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject. 

"Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10", Vol. 2, pp. 181-182. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1949. 

With the emergence of 5G, we are faced with an exposure situation not accounted for by guidelines - where many emissions, of different structures (phase, waveform, frequency, etcetera) occur randomly and simultaneously and can even superimpose in ways that have significance for living systems. 

Our legal case against the government maintains a focussed position in defining the core issue: Health and safety

Update 3


Aug. 19, 2020

Confusion in Europe over the impact of 5G on health and environment

Dear Friends and Supporters

Wow! What fantastic support and great comments, thank you all. As so many of you have correctly said, this is dangerous, untested and you do not want it for yourselves, your children or your grandchildren. And of course, you were not asked; it is being imposed by a very rich, and (apparently) very ignorant, but very persuasive industry in whose clutches we must assume our decision makers sit. What happened to democracy? And what happened to the mainstream media? (Rhetorical questions).

But we know that the industry does know because it has gone to a great deal of trouble keeping what it knows away from the public. And there are some quiet stirrings in the media. The radiation emissions from those huge masts will not be avoided no matter who you are, including those who refuse to write about it or want to believe it will not harm them.

How interesting that discussing the facts about health connections to radiation is considered dangerous. Dangerous to whom? If there are no dangers, why would the conversation be closed down?

The Council of the European Union, [Brussels, 9 June 2020 (OR. en), 8711/20 Shaping Europe's Digital Future - Council Conclusions (9 June 2020)] “EXPRESSES the importance of fighting against the spread of misinformation related to 5G networks, with special regard to false claims that such networks constitute a health threat …”


Given the quite remarkable attempts to close down all discussion, along with the gigantic masts appearing, it may slowly become apparent to those who have had no idea what is about to assault them, that something is very wrong.They may, with your help, learn a little more, especially when a recent briefing for the European Parliament in March 2020 states:

“Questions remain unanswered as to what 5G actually is, what it is for, whether it has impacts on human health and environment, whether it is secure…"


How can both the above statements be true? Either there are unanswered ‘questions’ or there are no questions but merely ‘misinformation’ and ‘false claims’. Which is it? One has to ask, does the European Union know what the briefing to the European Parliament is saying? How about our government?

So, although we have been quiet that does not mean inaction on our part. Tempting though it is to explore all the current concerns that so many of us share, we are staying focused on the parameters of our case against the levels of radio frequency radiation. Our legal team has the evidence and it is working with a global network of lawyers and scientific experts. The irradiation programme is global and the strategies employed are coordinated even though manifestly mismanaged as is evidenced by the above conflicting statements.

We will expose 5G for what it is. Stay with us, we’re on a mission. We have all of you to thank for your incredible support in words and for your generosity in funds. Blessings.

Actionagainst5g legal team.

Update 2


July 13, 2020

Good progress

Dear Amazing Supporters, huge thanks. Together we can achieve great things, this really is teamwork and your part in it is crucial and so very much appreciated.

As of today, thanks to your support with over £90,000 we are well on the way to our target of £150,000! 

As a result, the case is progressing. 

On  May 22 2020 our legal team sent a Letter Before Action to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, Secretary of State for Environment,  Health and Rural Affairs and the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sports.  The Departments also received from the legal team A Review of the Health Risks of Radiofrequency Radiation Employed in 5G Technology and the Implications for UK Policymaking.

The Letter of Action and Review were the first steps stating that the government is in breach of our human rights by ignoring the evidence of harm associated with 5G. The evidence does not go away because it is not looked at. In fact, it grows day by day. 

Our brilliant legal team, led by Michael Mansfield QC, continues to gather solid evidence. Reports and documents are meticulously and rigorously assembled. This careful preparation is the key to success and your patience with this process is much appreciated. 

Please continue to share our website and bring this funding campaign to any who do not yet know about our legal action. 

If you have a message offering help, we cannot access your details from this crowd justice page to thank you or respond so, again, please contact us directly at actionagainst5g.org.

We will be back in touch with updates as soon as they arise. Again, your patience as the wheels of justice turn, is much appreciated. Your comments are inspiring and encouraging, and we read every one. In the meantime, rest assured, progress is afoot. 

We send you massive gratitude from all of us at actionagainst5g. 

Update 1


June 5, 2020

Thank you for all your support, please continue to donate

To all of you, a big thank you. Together your generous donations have now reached over £60,000. It’s very gratifying to see this level of support for this case that is so essential. Together we will go forward.

We welcome all your wonderful and generous messages, your contributions, information and good wishes; all of which have demonstrated to us your strength of feeling. They are incredibly encouraging.

The initial £50,000 was needed to secure the action. In the event of not achieving this target, all donations would have been returned and the case could not have proceeded.

We sent a letter before action to the Government last month. The Government lawyers have acknowledged our letter but have not substantively responded yet. Due to Covid-19 they asked for an extension, which we reluctantly accepted. In the meantime the legal team are working around the clock to prepare the case, assembling the expert research and collating evidence.

Our two junior barristers are working at half their normal hourly rate, which demonstrates their commitment, supported by a full time assistant, and we also have a full time legal researcher working pro bono. As we gather our funds towards £150,000 we will be continuing to develop our grounds and evidence for the case. Whilst we will be seeking an order which caps liability for the costs of the defendants in the event that we lose the case, we need to ensure that we are able to continue the claim in the event that this is not granted. This is why we need to continue to raise funds to meet our stretch target.

CrowdJustice data protection measures mean that we do not have access to full contact details for those of you who have donated and kindly offered to help us. If you would like a response, please use the Contact Us form on our website.

Your continuing support is vital, especially by reaching out to others who may know little, so please tell them and give them a link to our website and the Crowd justice page. With you supporting us we can achieve a new reality: one where our government pays attention.

With great thanks

    There are no public comments on this case page.