Palestine Action to be proscribed - but what does that mean?
Palestine Action faces being proscribed as a terror group after activists broke into RAF Brize Norton and damaged two military aircraft.
It was the latest law broken by the activist group. Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said they are also alleged to have caused millions of pounds of criminal damage and assaulted a police officer with a sledgehammer.
He said he was "shocked and frustrated" to learn that a protest in support of the group was being planned on Monday, but that the force had "no power in law" to prevent it.
The group's proscription, however, would change that.
But what is proscription, what effect does it have, and how many proscribed organisations are there?
What is proscription?
Proscription is the banning of an organisation based on an assessment that it commits or participates in, prepares for, promotes or encourages, or is otherwise concerned in terrorism, the Home Office says.
1:49
The home secretary can choose to proscribe an organisation if it is found to do any of the following:
• Commits or participates in acts of terrorism
• Prepares for terrorism
• Promotes or encourages terrorism (including the unlawful glorification of terrorism); or,
• Is otherwise concerned in terrorism.
Any move to proscribe the group must be debated and approved by MPs and peers.
When deciding to proscribe an organisation, the government takes into account:
• The nature and scale of an organisation's activities
• The specific threat that it poses to the UK
• The specific threat that it poses to British nationals overseas
• The extent of the organisation's presence in the UK
• The need to support other members of the international community in the global fight against terrorism.
What does proscribing a group do?
It makes it illegal to show support for the proscribed group, with any offences punishable by a maximum of 14 years in prison.
2:45
Specifically, it is a criminal offence to:
• Belong to a proscribed organisation
• Invite support for a proscribed organisation
• Recklessly express support for a proscribed organisation
• Arrange a meeting in support of a proscribed organisation
• Wear clothing or carry articles in public which arouse reasonable suspicion that an individual is a member or supporter of a proscribed organisation
• Publish an image of an article such as a flag or logo in the same circumstances.
The last two offences are less severe and punishable by up to six months in prison and/or a fine not exceeding £5,000.
How many proscribed organisations are there?
There are 81 organisations proscribed by the UK government under the Terrorism Act 2000, not including 14 organisations in Northern Ireland such as the Irish Republican Army (IRA) that were proscribed under previous legislation.
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is on the proscribed list and the most recent addition is The Terrorgram collective - an online transnational network of extreme right-wing terrorists which the government says wants to bring about the collapse of Western democracy and a "race war".
You can see the full list by clicking here.
Can a proscribed group be taken off the list?
The group or someone deemed to be "affected" by a proscription can submit a written application to the home secretary requesting that they consider taking them off the list.
If the application is refused, the applicant can appeal to the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, which allows an appeal if it considers that the home secretary's decision to refuse de-proscription was "flawed".
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
26 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Cutting personal independent payments: potentially devastating or justified?
As predicted (Starmer offers 'massive concessions' on welfare bill to Labour rebels, 26 June), an attempt has been made to salvage the welfare bill. Discontented MPs and disabled people alike will welcome the assurance that people currently receiving personal independence payments (Pip) or the health element of universal credit will be protected from changes. But the episode is damaging, has caused thousands of disabled people needless worry, and may come to be seen as pivotal in Keir Starmer's tenure. There is something deeply invidious about having two classes of benefit recipients – the protected current recipients, and those making future claims. At the same time, it is clear that the benefits system does need reform and, in particular, needs to support people into work rather than taking a punitive and brutal approach to cost saving. How Starmer has ended up in this position is fascinating, if it were not extraordinary for a government with such a majority and the potential to make radical and equitable change to be repeatedly wrongfooted. U-turns look weak and messy, and presenting them as a response to active listening is unlikely to convince anyone. Starmer claims not to be ideological, and there is the issue; policy is being shaped not by a coherent strategic vision and principle-driven aspirations for better lives, opportunities and genuine equality, but by economic necessity and caution. It's a flawed model, certain to intensify divisions between ministries, Labour members, taxpayers, benefit recipients and the wider electorate. There is major learning and reflection needed by the government; the optics have gone badly wrong, but the welfare reform chaos is a symptom of a much deeper political Melanie HenwoodHartwell, Northamptonshire I am a social worker and I support cutting Pips. I have encountered a number of young adults trapped in a cycle of welfare dependency, unemployment and chaotic lifestyles. They share a belief that the state must fund every aspect of life, and a lack of understanding that benefits come not 'from the government' but are redistributed from taxation of the population. Pip is often claimed on the basis of anxiety or depression, but the idea of working to support oneself, or seeking training or education to make work more attainable, is absent from their thinking. The answer? Probably a combination of education, early interventions and nudges towards culture change, including reducing the availability of Pip. In the long term the status quo won't help the young people I work and address supplied What is not being made clear in government statements and coverage of the cuts to disability benefits is the personal independence payment's relationship to work. Pip is paid to help with the additional costs arising from disability. It is paid to people in work and out of work. It is crucial in enabling people to stay in work, paying for technical and personal support, health needs, travel and other costs. It also enables people who cannot work full-time to work. What will happen to these working people when they can no longer afford the additional costs? It's clear the government does not understand the role of Pip in enabling BetteridgeManchester As we approach the parliamentary vote on the new welfare bill, spare a thought for the many Pip recipients who received the benefit when it was known as disability living allowance. I suspect, for many, the scars still linger from that government change to the system. What that revealed was that disability allowance was not directed to those most in need of it due to their disability. Rather, receiving the new benefit depended upon one's ability to fill out a 40-page form. Next, it depended on having the physical and mental resilience to challenge the result and take it to a tribunal. This was a protracted and stressful period of time. For many, who made it that far, the tribunal reversed the DWP scoring and people found that they had their old level of benefit reinstated. Just a shame that stress makes many medical conditions far worse for the individual. Many years ago, I believed that the DWP wanted to help those with serious disabilities. These days, I have as much faith in them as they appear to have in disabled people (DWP letters now seem to be written with a subtext of 'you're a fraud and we'll catch you').Name and address supplied Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The Sun
31 minutes ago
- The Sun
‘Like Fort Knox' fume shoppers as major UK supermarket slaps security tags on £2 HAM to foil shoplifters
A SHOPPER was fuming after finding security tags on £2 ham at a major supermarket to foil shoplifters A shocked Tesco customer spotted the yellow stickers on a range of meat. 4 4 They had "security protected" written on them. The cheapest items they were on were £2.50 Honey Roast Ham. But customers can buy two for £4, making them £2 each. The same deal was on slices of roast beef. They cost £2.75 but were again £2 each when buying two under the deal. The tags were also on bigger packs of Honey Roast Ham for £2.65. Chicken fillets priced at £2.75 had them too. Plus Tesco Finest Wiltshire Cured Ham - £3.75 or two for £6 - which were £3 each. Blocks of Cheddar cheese costing £3.35 were also available. As well as Gammon, priced at £4.50. "It's like Fort Knox in there,' dad Dylan John, 48, told What's The Jam. "You can't move without security keeping a beady eye on you. "I only pooped in for a lettuce and felt like Ronnie Kray walking round the aisles." Astonishing moment Tesco staff lob metal baskets and crates at shoplifter They were spotted in Tesco Express, in Central Drive, Blackpool, Lancs. The mini supermarket is in the shadows of the town's seaside resort's Blackpool Tower. In March 2023, the anti-theft measures were put on ham, but then the cheapest were £2.35. Mince and pork were also tagged. Tesco said putting security tags on certain items isn't new, but it varies from store to store. It comes after footage showed the moment a Tesco worker hurled baskets and storage boxes at a pair of crooks. The cause of the incident is unknown, but shoppers were left shaken after the terrifying standoff took place. The incident seemingly began in a tame manner, with a security guard telling two men to exit the Tesco store in Finsbury Park, North London. He can be heard on the video saying: 'Take your stuff and go.' Next, one of the men ejected from the store fired back with 'f*** you' prompting the security guard to make a chilling threat. The security guard can be heard saying: 'You come next time and I'll f*** your a** up, okay? Call the police.' Then, the two men volleyed an unidentified object at the Tesco store - prompting the security guard to fire back with an empty storage tray. Tensions reached a boiling point when the men threw yet another storage tray, causing a uniformed worker to hurl a metal basket at them. Finally, the two men toppled a metal shelf which was standing outside the store before hurling another object into the shop. 4
BBC News
34 minutes ago
- BBC News
Charles Parkinson pulls out of Guernsey's chief minister race
One of the contenders to become the next president of the Policy and Resources Committee has pulled out of the Charles Parkinson said he will instead back election poll-topper Deputy Lindsay de Sausmarez for the role. "I am pleased to be supporting Lindsay for chief minister, and believe she can bring the new assembly together."Deputies Jonathan Le Tocq and Mark Helyar have both said they will stand for the role at the election on 1 July. After he declared he would not contest the position, Parkinson said: "I hope to gain a seat on the Policy and Resources Committee to assist with the review of tax policy which must now take place."In the last term Guernsey's States agreed to introduce a 5% GST, a lower rate of income tax for earnings under £30,000 and reform social security contributions. Parkinson wants to ensure the island's corporate tax regime is reformed before GST is introduced. He attempted twice in the last term to change the island's corporate tax regime, where currently most companies pay no tax, while big firms pay 10% tax on their profits. Earlier this week, business group GIBA criticised plans to reform the island's corporate tax structure. Forward Guernsey leader Deputy Gavin St Pier has already said he will not stand for the position, but would like to serve on P&R, potentially as treasury lead.
