Alexander Horne
The Spectator
Originally posted 19 Aug 24
The Home Secretary Yvette Cooper has reportedly ‘ordered a review’ of Britain’s counter-extremism strategy. According to the Daily Telegraph, she was minded to treat ‘extreme misogyny’ as terrorism for the first time. It is suggested that the review would be completed later in the autumn, and that a new counter-extremism strategy would be launched early next year.
When discussing this issue, it is tempting to use the terms ‘terrorism’ and ‘extremism’ interchangeably. In law, however, they are not identical and should not be conflated. The definition of terrorism is contained in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2000 and captures actions, or threats of action, designed to influence the government, or intimidate the public (or sections of the public) where such activities are made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause. Actions and threats covered by section 1 include those which would involve serious violence against a person, endanger a person’s life, or create a serious risk to the safety of the public or a section of the public.
Organisations engaged in terrorism-related activity can be banned by the state. The dissemination of terrorist publications, and the promotion or encouragement of terrorism (including the glorification of terrorism), is also illegal.
Here are some thoughts:
The UK Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, has ordered a review of Britain's counter-extremism strategy, considering treating "extreme misogyny" as terrorism for the first time. However, the distinction between terrorism and extremism is crucial, with terrorism being a legally defined term under the Terrorism Act 2000, whereas extremism is a broader and less defined concept. The review aims to address the complexities of combating extremism while avoiding the pitfalls of restricting lawful activities and conflicting with fundamental rights and freedoms.
The government's efforts to restrict extremism have faced criticism and challenges in the past, with concerns about clarifying the definition of extremism and avoiding conflicts with existing legal frameworks. The recent review by Sir William Shawcross highlighted the need for a proportionate approach to addressing all extremist ideologies. Any new measures to limit extremist activities must be taken in an even-handed way, addressing violent misogynistic views across the board, and enforcing existing laws more effectively, impartially, and justly.
