Sally Rooney says she will not be able to publish books in the UK during the PLO ban Sally Rooney

Irish writer Sally Rooney has told the High Court that she is unlikely to be able to publish new works within the UK while a ban on the PLO remains in place due to her public support for the group.

On the second day of a legal challenge to the PLO ban, the impact on Rooney, who said her books could disappear from UK stores altogether, was held up as an example of its impact on freedom of expression.

In her witness statement, the best-selling author of Normal People and Conversations with Friends said: “I will almost certainly no longer be able to publish or produce any new work within the UK while this ban remains in place.”

“If the PLO is still banned by the time my next book is due to be published, it will be available to readers all over the world and in dozens of languages, but it will not be available to readers in the UK simply because no one will be allowed to publish it (unless I am content to give it away for free).”

Since the ban, Rooney has said she intends to use proceeds from her work to support Palestinian work, which prompted her to cancel a trip to the UK to pick up an award for fear of arrest.

She said legal uncertainty meant it was difficult to predict how the ban would affect the availability of her books, but it was possible that her publisher Faber & Faber could be legally prevented from paying the royalties owed to her, in which case “my existing works may have to be withdrawn from sale and therefore no longer be available to readers in the UK.”

“My novels have been influential and popular in Britain, where I have been among the best-selling literary authors of the past decade. The disappearance of my works from bookshops would represent a truly severe incursion by the state into the world of artistic expression.”

Rooney described the work of the Palestinian Labor Organization as “courageous and admirable” and dedicated to preventing crimes against humanity committed by Israel. The author said that she was given no reason to withdraw her support for the direct action protest group, other than that “it would be more convenient for me personally and professionally if I demonstrated.”

The court also heard on Wednesday from Adam Straw KC, representing Ben Saul, the UN Special Rapporteur on the protection of human rights while countering terrorism, one of three intervenors in the case (the other two being Liberty and Amnesty UK).

“There is a consensus or emerging consensus that this embargo was an unlawful interference in international law. There is also a consensus or emerging consensus that the definition of terrorism does not extend to serious damage to property,” Straw said in written submissions.

Responding to the Home Secretary, Sir James Eadie KC said the UK Parliament had the right to define what terrorism was. He added: “Parliament has decided what terrorism is, which includes serious damage to property, whether there is violence against people or not.”

The Metropolitan Police said 143 people were arrested outside court on Wednesday on charges of supporting a banned group. The final day of the judicial review is scheduled to be Tuesday.