Counter-terror plans threaten investigative journalism and research
29 Jun 2018

Plans to introduce new counter-terror laws risk stifling legal freedom of expression in the UK and could stop journalists and academics from carrying out much-needed investigations into extremist and other groups with possible prison sentences for investigating stories rising to 15 years.

UK-based free speech campaigners Index on Censorship submitted a paper to the parliamentary committee scrutinising the bill this week, arguing that a number of proposed clauses could discourage journalists from carrying out valuable public interest reports and hamper research.

“The first priority of governments is said to be the security of their peoples. Yet that security is not an end in itself but a means to allow people to live freely. Free expression is vital to living in freedom,” said Index on Censorship magazine editor Rachael Jolley. “We must ensure that government does not — in an attempt to make us more secure — end up making us less free.”

Index has identified a number of potential problems with the bill as proposed. These include:

1. Making it a criminal offence to express an opinion or belief in support of a proscribed organisation and be “reckless” as to whether that would influence others to do so.

As the former Attorney-General Dominic Grieve MP wrote in an edition of Index on Censorship magazine: “If the Irish Taoiseach made a speech about the Easter Rising as a glorious moment in Irish history, and if you have someone who happened to be a member of the Real IRA and it motivated them to go on with some unfinished business, could the Taoiseach be arrested?”  Clearly, this would be absurd. Yet, for a UK citizen, it could be the effect of introducing Clause 1 of this Bill 10 years later. This imposes a test of prophecy not recklessness.

2. Making it an offence to download or stream material likely to be useful to a terrorist if done three times.  

We are concerned that this proposal would have a restrictive effect on researchers, students, academics and journalists, among others, who are researching case studies, making arguments and carrying out interviews. The act of researching information using the internet, or any other method, should not be a criminal act. We propose an amendment to the Bill to provide a clear exemption from the clause’s provisions for those whose purposes in downloading or streaming material are not motivated by terrorist intent.

3. Extension of maximum sentences for collecting and communicating information

Increasing sentences can have a chilling effect on legitimate research. The Terrorism Act 2000, whose maximum sentences this Bill seeks to increase, has already been used to seek to pursue journalists. For example, the Act has been used to prosecute reporters including Newsnight’s Richard Watson for his reporting on Islamists and violent extremism.

“Governments around the world are responding to threats of terrorism and we know that the balance between security and freedom is a hard one to achieve,” said Jolley. “However, we also see how easily laws intended to maintain the conditions of freedom can be used, and abused, to stifle freedom of expression. The current law threatens 10 years in prison; the Bill would extend that to 15. We believe this will have an even greater impact on creating a climate of fear around legitimate research in a free society.”

As the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Max Hill has said: “Weakening human rights laws will not make us safer. Terrorists cannot take away our freedoms – and we must not do so ourselves.”

For more information, please contact Rachael Jolley: [email protected]

Index on Censorship: 0207 963 7262

An upcoming review of the Prevent counter-extremism programme is at risk of becoming a “whitewash”

The groups are urging the government to ensure that the review of Prevent is comprehensive and truly independent

House of Lords must ensure Prevent is subject to independent review

Index on Censorship joins with seven other human rights organisations to call for an independent review of the UK’s Prevent strategy.

Annual review of listed terrorist organisations would be a step in the right direction for counter-terror bill

While there has been little progress in the House of Lords when it comes to protecting freedom of expression in the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill, a proposed new amendment by Lord Anderson deserves support.

Groups urge House of Lords to rethink Counter-Terror and Border Security Bill

The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill would restrict freedom of expression and press freedom, threaten the protection of journalistic sources, and undermine academic research in Britain. It would limit the right to access information online and it would sneak in a new, harsh border regime for Northern Ireland. The Bill has been slipping through Parliament with little attention. The […]

Comments are closed.