I think I need to post this comment made by Lord Anderson of Ipswich, who is a lawyer, in the House of Lords this week, when discussing the Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2025. He said this, and within it is a clear warning:
My Lords, I will be brief. Invoking the terrorism laws has consequences and, although I do not object to invoking them in relation to any of these three groups, we need to understand properly what those consequences are. Many people want to speak, and I will make only one point, which is that the consequences of designation for individuals misguided enough to approve of, for example, Palestine Action are rather more draconian than the Explanatory Memorandum to this order suggests.
Paragraph 5.20 of that document states:
“It is a criminal offence for a person to belong to, or invite support for, a proscribed organisation. It is also a criminal offence to arrange a meeting to support a proscribed organisation”.
That is an accurate summary of Section 11 and Section 12(1) and (2) of the Terrorism Act 2000. If you are a member or a promoter of a proscribed organisation, you can face up to 14 years in prison.
However, since the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Act 2019 introduced Section 12(1A) to the Terrorism Act 2000, you can also be looking at up to 14 years if you express
“an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation”,
without even needing an intention that your listener or listeners should agree—being reckless about that suffices. By our bringing Palestine Action, for example, within the ambit of the terrorism laws, anyone who is young and foolish enough to say that its heart is in the right place, or that the Government should listen to it, is committing a very serious offence for which they could be prosecuted, convicted and imprisoned as a terrorist. It is not their right to protest but the right of freedom of speech that is the issue here.
Does the Minister agree that this 2019 offence takes us on to more sensitive territory than the others? Can he tell us whether its potential impact was considered as part of the Government's analysis of these decisions, even though it was not referred to in the Explanatory Memorandum? Might it be a good idea, for future proscription debates, to ensure that the Explanatory Memorandum template is updated to make reference to the full arsenal of proscribed organisation offences?
The Minister left all the ambiguities in place.
Three things are clear. First, this ban is more severe than the government itself says.
Second, this means that the risks are also higher than the government suggests.
Third, as a publisher, I am at definite risk if people seek to make comments here that carry a severe risk of penalty now.
What also seems certain is that the ban now covers implied support.
I made my opinion on this ban and its implications clear last week. But the world has changed now, and this specific issue is not one that I think is worth going to prison for. You might wish to take that risk, but I have bigger battles on broader fronts to fight. So, as a matter of fact, please do not make comments here with regard to proscribed organisations. If you do:
- You put me at risk
- You put yourself at risk
- You waste my time
- You increase my stress.
Please don't do it then.
And if you do, you face the risk of being banned now, whoever you are. Sorry, but I am not going to prison for you.
Saying which, I make clear:
- You can discuss Israel
- You can condemn genocide
- You can make it clear why you object to what Israel is doing
- You cannot be anti-semitic
- You cannot in any way promote a proscribed organisation
And please don't object to what I am saying. My position is clear, and you may be banned, as this matter is now outside my control and, as I mentioned, I have other agendas to pursue as well.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
The repercussions appear to have begun. See this Sky News report.
https://news.sky.com/story/police-arrest-protesters-supporting-palestine-action-after-group-designated-as-terrorist-organisation-13392763
My concern with this (aside from the obvious – continued dismantling of the right to protest, speak freely, challenge the government, etc) is that i don’t think it is at all clear what “supportive beliefs or opinions” actually means. For example, you say you are fine with people commenting that they “condemn genocide”, and that they can “make it clear why [they] object to what Israel is doing” but given there is a lot of overlap in those comments with what a certain group are saying, could those comments themselves be construed as an example of something “supportive” for such a group, even if they don’t say so explicitly?
This is a dangerous position to be in, and as far as I see it the only way to truly be safe is to say nothing at all. Which I suspect is the point.
I will have to err on the side of caution.
An important blog: everyone should read and then re-read Lord Anderson’s warning based on careful analysis of the relevant legislative texts.
This situation is clearly an attack on civil liberties, on which some dissenters will test the limits. Ultimately it will not help the Government to have to incarcerate -using the judicial system -lots of people who choose to confront an unjust law.
I expect in time ministers will regret this draconian action. We will see.
Agreed; convictions are going to be hard to secure.
But I am notgoing to take risk for someone else.
I wondered how long this would take to come about.
Richard
Tonight I watched the BBC documentary about Gaza that ended up on Channel 4.
Many a time I have come here and said things with my ‘heart in the right place’ but painfully aware that I am not responsible for the blog.
My view – FWIW – is that it would be much safer if the blog sticks to economic, financial and political economy content because – well – money is the root of all evil anyway, including alleged genocide, which I imagine is quite expensive to fund. It just might be flying too close to the wind to mention events in your know where?
I think that that would help to reign us all in and keep us on the straight and narrow until MMT, your Taxing Wealth Report and Resource Accounting also become proscribed? It might also be easier on you. I for one will no longer respond to the topic – it is obvious to me what is happening and why.
The world has changed. But I think many of us still know wrong from right, in our own minds where they cannot reach us. Ever.
Noted.
Thanks.
Agreed. Far better to focus on the causes rather than the symptoms.
Am I allowed to say that 38 degrees has a petition asking Yvette Cooper to proscribe the IDF? It has nearly 12000 signatures already.
Yes. But it is rather pointless, I think, not least by endorsing her past actions.
Watching Crispin Flintoff tomorrow morning will be interesting.
JenW
I think you are trying to push boundaries
Please don’t
I have explained my reasons
You can do what you like, but not here
Richard
I would rather the government were challenged to impose sanctions on senior Israeli defence officials including all the relevant ministers, senior IDF Commanders, along with all identifiable IDF personnel who have posted their activities on social media in ways that breach IHL.
If any of those individuals have dual UK/Israeli citizenship, with British passports, they could choose between surrendering their British citizenship or returning to UK to face arrest and trial in UK courts for war crimes (I think there is ample precedent, with regard to other dual passport holders and other Brits who have gone abroad and been implicated in war crimes).
Of course it won’t happen, but I welcome any opportunity to show up the UK government’s hypocrisy.
https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/uk/2025/04/07/ten-british-members-of-israeli-military-accused-of-war-crimes/
I understand that merely serving in the IDF in the current conflict, is NOT covered by the 1870 legislation as neither the Gaza nor W Bank conflicts are WARS (although they are often referred to as such) because the UK does not recognise Palestine as a state, yet.
Why do I believe in this course of action? Because, however hopeless it seems, we need to keep banging on about IHL. It’s going out of fashion fast. The Tories were en route to dismantling it, and unless we hold Labour’s feet to the fire, they will do the same, even if our PM was once an International Human Rights lawyer, He was once a member of the Haldane Society of Socialist lawyers, till they threw him out.
https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/obiter/legal-comrades-show-starmer-the-red-card/5107377.article
He was a lot of things once.
But right now he shares family values with a fascist US President, is allies with a rogue state committing war crimes on a daily basis, and is becoming increasingly authoritarian at home.
Thanks
Richard’s work is too valuable to put at risk. I would urge contributors to respect his wishes.
Thanks
This is a sad day for democracy.
Individuals who take on the state with open defiance tend to lose. The state is VERY powerful – as those objecting to Trump are finding out.
But sometimes the state can be shown to be ridiculous, or bullies or pathetic. Gandhi was good at making the British Raj look all those things but at the cost of a fair bit of jail time for himself.
The mass seaside protests against the salt tax seemed to be very effective.
Personally I’d go for making the state look ridiculous. Creative thinking can come up with a lot of options.
I suspect gaffer tape may sell well as people tape up their mouths and carry censored placards on protests, but as the police can now arrest you for almost anything, we may need “nightingale prisons and “nightingale courts” as our “completely independent” police exercise their discretion “completely free ftom government pressure of any sort”.
This would have been done by the Ministry of Love in 1984. maybe in collaboration with the Ministry of Truth.
There are many thought crimes on this blog so this was always only a matter of time.
Having eagerly taken your advice I have, minutes ago, asked ChatGpt to write a letter to my MP asking why he voted to proscribe Palestine Action.
I emailed the letter but am I responsible for everything it says legally. It was wonderfully explicit.
You are responsible
I am delighted to see this in the National:
https://www.thenational.scot/news/25291394.new-direct-action-group-yvette-cooper-emerges/
No endorsement of anything that breaks the law in the link, but someone once said the thing autocracy hates most is being laughed at and as Britain becomes ever more autocratic, we shall see what the govt’s response to the above mockery is.
Asinine Reaction
Might I ask
Without wearing
A scarf,
A flag,
Or a mask…
Is it OK, now
To wonder if we are subject to
Some Clementine Olfaction
To sweeten what some would claim
Is merely an Anodyne Redaction
Which, when seen through
Rose tinted
Crystalline Refraction…
Is simply no more than
Levantine Distraction?
Buckingham
5 July 2025
Yes
I suspect that Yvette’s lawyers were conscious of the free speech angle.
Just taking these people to court for criminal damage would have given them a platform.
The fact is, that the definition of “terrorism” is now very elastic and with a few articles in the Mail, Sun, Express & Telegraph it shouldn’t be too difficult to encompass a whole range of other activities.
Personally I think your political economy work on this blog is essential and will be of untold value for generations to come and, on this basis alone, do not hesitate to remove those that post comments that put you at risk
Thanks
Thanks for the “Heads Up” Richard.
I’m Lead Adminstrator on a pro-SNP/ Scottish Independence political Page. In addition we do post & comment on politics Worldwide.
I’ve published this blog to the Page and brought it to the notice of my fellow Admins with regards to future posts & comments.
Thanks
Many thanks for posting this. It should also be known that if the government was being truly even handed in enforcing such legislation here in Northern Ireland where such jurisdiction also applies that the still armed extremist groups within Unionism and their active supporters would not be being given a platform daily, and for decades now, on the BBC N.I. radio’s Nolan programme.
The only silver lining on this UK ruling class authoritarian cloud is that it is exposing their ideological belief which is certainly not that of social democracy.
& thus does democracy and the ability to express ones views candidly die with a whimper rather than a bang.
All this was predicted nearly 20 years ago. The only modest changes is that the recent legislation has been driven by foreign interests.
Good evening, UK. Allow me first to apologize for this interruption. I do, like many of
you, appreciate the comforts of every day routine- the security of the familiar, the
tranquillity of repetition. I enjoy them as much as any bloke. But in the spirit of
commemoration, thereby those important events of the past usually associated with
someone’s death or the end of some awful bloody struggle, a celebration of a nice holiday, I
thought we could mark this November the 5th, a day that is sadly no longer remembered,
by taking some time out of our daily lives to sit down and have a little chat.
There are of course those who do not want us to speak. I suspect even now, orders are being shouted
into telephones, and men with guns will soon be on their way. Why? Because while the
truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words
offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the
truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn’t there? Cruelty and
injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to
think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing
your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who’s to blame? Well
certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable,
but again truth be told, if you’re looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror.
I wonder whether similar ‘executive orders’ will become a regular thing here, where the government will be able to execute ‘pardons’ (should there ever be a chance ‘they’ be held accountable) so no one is ever held to account.
I have been losing faith rapidly of late in any kind of karma or justice, while we watch blatant complicity with the horrors going on.
As far as I remember I have never commented on the matters you speak about, for the simple reason I don’t know enough about them in accurate detail. Where you have increased my knowledge is in monetary and economic information which I find invaluable. So I’ll stick to those subjects, especially when it involves all matters affecting Scotland, and its people.
Noted
What a terrible place we have come too. “Free Speech” is in danger of being silenced, I am also afraid for the Jewish people of the world. There seems, in uneducated circles, no difference between Jewish and Zionism. This by the government enhances the case of antisemitism, that should not happen, whereas the problem is of Zionist/fascist making. You have the right to censor or delete this as you wish.
I agree with this. And we must say it.