• Disrupting Power Since 2015
  • Donate
  • Login
Sunday, May 25, 2025
  • Login
  • Register
Canary
MEDIA THAT DISRUPTS
  • News
    • UK
    • Global
    • Analysis
    • Trending
  • Editorial
  • Features
    • Features
    • Environment
    • Lifestyle
    • Health
    • Money
    • Science
    • Business
    • Tech
    • Travel
    • Sport & Gaming
  • Media
    • Video
    • Cartoons
  • Opinion
No Result
View All Result
MANAGE SUBSCRIPTION
SUPPORT
  • News
    • UK
    • Global
    • Analysis
    • Trending
  • Editorial
  • Features
    • Features
    • Environment
    • Lifestyle
    • Health
    • Money
    • Science
    • Business
    • Tech
    • Travel
    • Sport & Gaming
  • Media
    • Video
    • Cartoons
  • Opinion
No Result
View All Result
Canary
No Result
View All Result

Priti Patel is proposing a new terrorism offence that should worry us all

Emily Apple by Emily Apple
23 January 2020
in Editorial, Global, UK
Reading Time: 5 mins read
164 8
A A
3
Home Editorial
320
SHARES
2.5k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Home secretary Priti Patel is proposing a new terrorism offence. And it’s one that should worry us all. Not just because the UK already has an array of draconian terrorism laws but because of the implications for freedom of speech and what might be included.

Patel is looking at whether there is “a gap in the legislation” and is proposing creating an offence prohibiting possession of terrorist and extremist material. Currently, it is a crime to distribute terrorism information, but not simply to own it.

Just in itself, this is a frightening prospect that criminalises thought – especially given that while terrorism is defined in law, extremism doesn’t have a legal definition. But in the context of a policing strategy that equates protest with terrorism, it is utterly terrifying.

The proposal

The proposals for the new offence came after the inquest into the deaths of the people killed during the London Bridge attacks. Chief coroner Mark Lucraft raised concerns that:

While there are offences of possessing a document likely to be useful to a person in committing an act of terrorism (Section 58, Terrorism Act 2000), and of disseminating terrorist publications (Section 2, Terrorism Act 2006), there is no offence of possessing terrorist or extremist propaganda material. It may be impossible to take action even when the material is of the most offensive and shocking character.

Meanwhile, lawyer Jonathan Hall, the Home Office appointed “independent” reviewer of terrorism legislation and defender of the police in the Undercover Policing Inquiry claimed:

Whilst propaganda is too slippery a term to be useful in defining a criminal offence, I think there is a good case for focusing on possession of the most violent forms of terrorist imagery such as torture and beheadings… it may be sensible to prohibit possession of extreme terrorist material.

While it’s hard to imagine a scenario that isn’t academic or journalistic to possess images of beheadings, it’s important to remember there’s a myriad of existing terrorism laws – laws which are already draconian. In fact, one of the only pieces of legislation that passed through our Brexit blocked parliament was the 2019 Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act. Amongst other provisions, this Act widened the offence of “inviting support to a proscribed organisation” to:

cover expressions of support that are reckless as to whether they will encourage others to support the organisation.

The 2019 legislation also includes a new offence of streaming or viewing material useful for terrorism online even if it’s not downloaded and outlaws travelling to ‘designated areas’.

A slippery slope

But while Hall rightly states that propaganda is a “slippery term”, one of the biggest problems lies in defining terrorism and extremism. Because the way the state uses both is already a slippery slope.

On 17 January, the Guardian published a counter-terrorism document that listed organisations such as Greenpeace, Campaign Against Arms Trade and Animal Aid as extremist threats.

And on 10 January, environmental protest group Extinction Rebellion (XR) hit the headlines after its inclusion in a counter-terror policing document for safeguarding young and vulnerable people.

Although Patel accepted XR wasn’t a terrorist group, she defended its inclusion, stating it was “based in terms of risk to the public, security risks, security threats”. But while the liberal establishment is shocked and ‘scared’ by her defence, anyone with even a passing knowledge of protest policing will tell you this isn’t anything new.

Writing about XR in 2018, I warned:

we’re living at a time when authorities view any disruptive protest as domestic extremism and police it with counter-terrorism strategy.

Those protesting fracking have regularly been presented as extremists in Prevent counter-terrorism training. And in September 2019, the Guardian reported that a retired doctor was reported to Prevent over his involvement in XR.

Blurring the boundaries

I’m not arguing that if this legislation is enacted, people will immediately be prosecuted for having the XR logo or having photos of people blocking bridges. But it is a warning of how the boundaries can be blurred.

And it’s not like those boundaries haven’t been blurred before. For example, when the controversial S44 terrorism search powers were introduced that gave police blanket powers to stop anyone without needing reasonable suspicion, there were promises they wouldn’t be used on protesters.

But the reality was somewhat different. They were both used frequently and as a means of harassment and intelligence gathering on protests. In fact, they only stopped after two people took the case to the European Court of Human Rights.

Meanwhile, in 2018, 15 people were convicted of a terrorism-related offence for a peaceful protest that prevented a deportation flight taking off. The original offence was introduced in the wake of the Lockerbie bomb.

Immediate risk

While it’s possible to see the potential, XR won’t be affected by this legislation overnight. However, it’s likely other groups will – especially groups associated with the Kurdish Freedom movement that the state is desperate to label as terrorists.

While the PKK – the Kurdistan Workers’ Party – is a proscribed group in the UK, other Kurdish groups aren’t. And the YPG and YPJ are western allies, defeating Daesh (Isis/Isil) in Northern Syria aka Rojava. Many internationals, including those from the UK, have been inspired to travel to Rojava – both to fight Daesh and to learn and help with a progressive political movement that puts women and ecology at its centre.

Unlike XR, those involved in the Kurdish Freedom movement are already being prosecuted as terrorists. There are currently several people under police investigation for having travelled or attempting to travel to Rojava. In one instance a parent is on bail for sending their child money whilst there. Another person is on remand for attempting to travel there.  All for terrorism offences. Meanwhile, both Kurdish people and anyone associated with Kurdish politics are regularly stopped entering and leaving the country under Schedule 7 terrorism powers.

Given these movements are already being treated as terrorists, how “extreme” would “extreme terrorist material” need to be? Would possessing images of Kurdish freedom fighters count? Or what about, for example, the writings of Abdullah Öcalan, the imprisoned PKK leader whose work on democratic confederalism has inspired many of the ideas enacted in Rojava? These are not terrorist movements or ideas. But it’s easy to see how quickly and easily this law could be abused to cover them.

A very slippery slope

This proposed legislation is draconian and deeply worrying. And even excluding the documented ways the state regularly abuses terrorism laws and definitions, it would be chilling.

There’s going to be a lot we need to fight against under Boris Johnson’s parliamentary majority. But it’s essential that issues such as this one aren’t ignored as the potential implications for all of us are massive. And if we want to ensure we don’t slip into an increasingly totalitarian state, the fightback has to start now.

Featured image via screengrab

Share128Tweet80
Previous Post

Prison Service accused of ‘blatant disregard for life’ after failing to prevent racist attacks

Next Post

Viral video shows police brutality against ‘Yellow Vest’ mass protest in Paris

Next Post
Police attack protesters in Paris on 18 January 2020

Viral video shows police brutality against 'Yellow Vest' mass protest in Paris

Malaysia refuses to become the plastic 'rubbish dump of the world'

HS2 costs could rise to £106bn, says leaked review

The world's richest 22 men have more money than 325 million women in Africa

Elephant in a circus

After decades of campaigning, circuses will finally be banned from performing wild animals

Please login to join discussion
Rally Labour Merseyside Liverpool
Analysis

‘Labour needs sinking’: Merseyside resistance shows the former stronghold is moving on

by Ed Sykes
25 May 2025
horoscope
Horoscopes

Horoscope today: your 24-hour briefing for life, love, and more

by Steve Topple
25 May 2025
horoscope
Horoscopes

Horoscope today: your 24-hour briefing for life, love, and more

by Steve Topple
24 May 2025
foodbank use
Analysis

Austerity Britain continues. Foodbank use is up 5,000% – yet where are Labour?

by James Wright
23 May 2025
DWP report deaths
Analysis

The DWP is refusing to release a report into deaths of disabled people

by Steve Topple
23 May 2025
  • Contact
  • About & FAQ
  • Get our Daily News Email
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy

The Canary
PO Box 71199
LONDON
SE20 9EX

Canary Media Ltd – registered in England. Company registration number 09788095.

For guest posting, contact [email protected]

For other enquiries, contact: [email protected]

The Canary is owned and run by independent journalists and volunteers, NOT offshore billionaires.

You can write for us, or support us by making a regular or one-off donation.

© Canary Media Ltd 2024, all rights reserved | Website by Monster | Hosted by Krystal | Privacy Settings

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In
No Result
View All Result
  • News
    • UK
    • Global
    • Analysis
    • Trending
  • Editorial
  • Features
    • Features
    • Environment
    • Lifestyle
    • Health
    • Money
    • Science
    • Business
    • Tech
    • Travel
    • Sport & Gaming
  • Media
    • Video
    • Cartoons
  • Opinion

© 2023 Canary - Worker's co-op.

Before you go, have you seen...?

Rally Labour Merseyside Liverpool
Analysis
Ed Sykes

‘Labour needs sinking’: Merseyside resistance shows the former stronghold is moving on

horoscope
Horoscopes
Steve Topple

Horoscope today: your 24-hour briefing for life, love, and more

horoscope
Horoscopes
Steve Topple

Horoscope today: your 24-hour briefing for life, love, and more

foodbank use
Analysis
James Wright

Austerity Britain continues. Foodbank use is up 5,000% – yet where are Labour?

ADVERTISEMENT
Analysis
Nathan Spears

Vote for the Press Photograph of the Year 2024

Image by Burkard Meyendriesch from Pixabay
Feature
Nathan Spears

Why Santiago Ways is the Leading Choice for Walking the Camino de Santiago

Environment
Nathan Spears

EU elections point to growing public desire for new policymaking approach in Brussels