‘Criminalising supporters of Isil could threaten free speech’
SUPPORTERS of Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant should not necessarily be criminalised, because it undermines free speech, a joint parliamentary committee says.
A report out today will say the Counter Terrorism and Border Security Bill “may criminalise curious minds and expressions of belief which do not carry any consequent harm or intent to cause harm”. Responding to the report, Ben Wallace, the Security Minister, told The Daily Telegraph: “This Government does not agree with the Committee’s conclusions in respect to human rights concerns. Its conclusions are misplaced and wrong. After the spate of terrorist attacks of last year and the deadly nerve agent attack this year, our intelligence services and police made the case for an update of existing legislation and some new powers to tackle the real and significant threat this country faces from terrorism and hostile states.”
The Joint Committee on Human Rights says it has “serious concerns” with the new powers the Government is proposing. The committee, chaired by Harriet Harman, the former Labour deputy leader, is concerned that some of the new powers are too vaguely defined and do not have sufficient safeguards to protect human rights.
The report will warn that academic and journalistic research may be criminalised by the Bill, as well as “inquisitive or foolish minds”.
Ms Harman said: “The Government has got an important job to keep us safe from terrorism. But it must also safeguard human rights.”
Some of the Bill’s provisions risk a disproportionate interference with the right to privacy, the report says.
“The committee believes that this Bill goes too far,” added Ms Harman.
The report comes as Gavin Williamson, the Defence Secretary, has said Isil must be wiped out if Britain is to avoid having to fight a future insurgency.
The committee voiced concerns that criminalising “expressions of support” without clearly defining what type of speech this refers to could prevent debate around the Government’s use of its powers. This could violate Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights – the right to freedom of expression – and could have “a chilling effect on debate in the public interest,” the report warns. It added that wearing an item of clothing or flying the flag of an organisation that is proscribed in the UK would be covered by the Bill, even if such conduct was lawful at the time in the foreign country where the conduct occurred.
One of the most controversial clauses of the Bill states that viewing material online that could be of use to terrorists will be criminalised if viewed three or more times. Legitimate academic study and the work of journalists could be swept up under these powers.