Extreme but not illegal

February 14th, 2008

Yesterday’s overturning of the convictions of five young men under the Terrorism Act signifies a change in how the courts deal with extremism, writes Jo Glanville

The quashing of the conviction of five students under the Terrorism Act at the Court of Appeal this week marks a sea change. The main evidence against the five young men (one of whom was a schoolboy at the time of his arrest) was the extremist material they had downloaded and shared on the Internet. They were prosecuted under Section 57 of the Terrorism Act 2000 for possessing articles for the purposes of terrorism.

In its judgment, the Court of Appeal revealed that Section 57 was designed to allow action to be taken against people found in possession of bomb-making material – in circumstances where there was a reasonable suspicion of a connection with terrorism. The material the young men had downloaded was described variously as propagandist, extremist and ideological. It was not material that contained instructions on how to make weapons or explosives. However the prosecution argued that the students were planning to travel to Pakistan, where they were going to train and then fight against the government in Afghanistan: this was the terrorist purpose for which they had downloaded material from the Internet. The Court of Appeal ruled that there was no direct connection between the material and a terrorist plan: the evidence did not support the case.

It is a judgment that breaks the link (which until now has gone virtually unquestioned) between extremism and terrorism. The Internet is seen as the hub of extremist activity – an underworld of activity that must be controlled. Jihadi material is viewed as such a toxic force that viewing it – “possessing” it – has become a criminal act. The Court of Appeal has poured cold water on these assumptions and demanded a much more rigorous, restricted interpretation of the law. The public response to the Samina Malik case last year marked the first shift in attitude towards extremist literature and any connection with terrorism. The Court of Appeal has now fundamentally called into question the application of the law.

Further reading from Index on Censorship Dec 2007 (pdfs)

Road to Jihad – Shiraz Maher
Taking on the radicals – David Livingstone

What happened to debate?

February 14th, 2008

The banning of a “preacher of hate” raises far more problems than it solves, writes Abdul-Rehman Malik

The recent denial of a visa to Yusuf al Qaradawi, the influential Qatar-based scholar accused of preaching hatred against homosexuals and encouraging terrorism amongst Palestinians living under Israeli occupation, is unsettling. The reasons for the rebuff are based on ad hoc, inconsistent policy and more importantly on a fear that a certain segment of our population is so particularly gullible and immature that they cannot be trusted to filter good ideas from bad ones.

The truth is that the UK welcomes all kinds of nefarious characters to its shores, whether they are retired despots (like Augusto Pinochet) or leaders of autocratic regimes (the list is rather long).

(more…)

Grooming for jihad

January 25th, 2008

New proposals to limit extremist speech could have a significant chilling effect on the Internet, argues Bill Thompson

Taking a leaf from its approach to prosecuting predatory paedophiles who use the Internet to establish contact with young people, the British government is planning to take on those who are promoting violence and extremism through websites, chat rooms and email.

Speaking at the first International Conference on Radicalisation and Political Violence on 17 January, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith focused on what she called “the threat posed by terror Svengalis who work to seduce young people into believing that terrorism is a fully feasible outlet for their teenage anger” and promised to “challenge the ideology of violent extremism behind the acts of terrorism”.

She went on to say: “If we are ready and willing to take action to stop the grooming of vulnerable young [people] on social networking sites, then I believe we should also take action against those who groom vulnerable people for the purposes of violent extremism.”

(more…)

New guidelines for combating campus extremism

January 25th, 2008