Proscribing Palestine Action would be “grave misuse of anti-terrorism powers”, Amnesty UK chief warns
Sacha Deshmukh, Amnesty UK CEO
Amnesty International have issued the following statement on why they oppose proposals to add Palestine Action to the government’s list of proscribed terrorist organisations.
Amnesty UK’s CEO Sacha Deshmukh has written to MPs and Peers today urging them to oppose the Government’s motion to proscribe the direct action network Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation.
The letter – which comes ahead of a vote in the House of Commons on Wednesday (2 July) and House of Lords on Thursday (3 July) – reminds Parliamentarians that the vote is not a test of whether or not they like Palestine Action’s approach to campaigning, but that what is at stake is whether or not they are banned as a terrorist organisation, with all the ramifications for human rights that come with that.
The letter reminds parliamentarians that the UK has for decades been able to respond to protest movements, some of which have used direct action and even isolated acts of violence, without deploying counter-terrorism powers.
The Amnesty International UK Chief Executive writes that UK terrorism laws “have long been criticised by international experts for containing problematic, overly broad and draconian restrictions on free speech in relation to proscribed groups”, which would mean that “simple expressions of personal moral opinions” will potentially become “serious crimes”.
Sacha Deshmukh said:
“The proscription of Palestine Action would be wholly unnecessary, disproportionate, and in violation of the right to freedom of association and expression amongst other human rights at risk should this harmful and dangerous motion proceed.”
The question before Parliament is not whether MPs think that Palestine Action’s approach is tasteful or distasteful, or even effective or ineffective. If Palestine Action is proscribed this week, by the weekend any MP’s constituents wearing a Palestine Action sticker, badge or T-shirt could face a terrorism charge. Do MPs and peers really believe that Palestine Action’s activities justify such a grave misuse of anti-terrorism powers?”
The letter in full reads:
To Members of the House of Commons, UK Parliament
and
Peers of the House of Lords, UK Parliament
I write to you as the CEO of Amnesty International UK, a section of the world’s largest human rights campaigning organisation, to call on you to oppose the Government’s motion to proscribe Palestine Action.
Amnesty is gravely concerned about the harmful implications that proscribing Palestine Action could have for the free speech rights of the wider Palestinian rights movement, and all those who, while not regarding themselves as members of a political movement, have viewed with increasing horror the unfolding genocide being perpetrated by Israel in the occupied Gaza Strip and potential UK complicity in those crimes.
UK terrorism laws have long been criticised by international experts for containing problematic, overly broad and draconian restrictions on free speech in relation to proscribed groups. These restrictions apply to everyone, not just members of the group. They transform speech that is ‘supportive’ of a proscribed group, is ‘reckless’ as to whether a listener might interpret it as supportive of a proscribed group, or that a reasonable listener might interpret as calling for the group’s actions to be emulated, into very serious terrorist offences.
As a result, simple expressions of personal moral opinions, such as the view that in the context of a genocide and apartheid Palestine Action’s tactics are morally justified, could become serious crimes if they are deemed to have been expressed in a way that might persuade someone who hears them. Perfectly legitimate speech and discussion of – amongst other things – protest tactics, political analysis regarding government policy on Gaza, and even legal action, will be chilled by the risk attached to saying something that could be construed as supportive of Palestine Action’s tactics. The breadth of the ‘support’ and ‘glorification’ offences if Palestine Action are proscribed are such that it may even be a crime in some circumstances to publicly call for them to be de-proscribed. One does not need to be an active member of Palestine Action to hold and express such views. Parliamentarians may disagree with these views, or may think them mistaken or unwise, but that is no basis for criminalising their expression.
There should be no question of peaceful protesters, political commentators, NGOs, academics, journalists and lawyers having to second guess whether the authorities will take a permissive or stringent approach to policing their perfectly legitimate speech and activities. The very fact that these speech laws will impose this burden of worry and the need for legal caution will stymie free speech around what are some of the most pressing political and moral issues of the day.
The UK’s extremely broad legal definition of terrorism has been the subject of concern by international human rights monitors, including our organisation, for many years. Just last year the UN Human Rights Committee called for the definition given in the Terrorism Act 2000 to be reviewed. This followed a similar comment from the UK’s own Supreme Court in 2013. By being so broad, these powers permit the government to treat as terrorists organisations and individuals who simply do not fit what can reasonably be considered as terrorism. Words matter, especially when those words bring with them a whole range of draconian powers that severely criminalise otherwise perfectly legitimate speech and activity.
Members of Parliament who raise these concerns may find themselves being reassured by Ministers that this is scaremongering and that the authorities will always use their powers reasonably and proportionately. However, this is precisely the argument that has been used for years to justify the UK’s overly broad terrorism definition to begin with, and now the UK is on the verge of treating a protest group as terrorists.
The UK has for decades been able to respond to protest movements, some of which have used direct action and even isolated acts of violence, without deploying counter-terrorism powers. The proscription of Palestine Action would be wholly unnecessary, disproportionate, and in violation of the right to freedom of association and expression amongst other human rights at risk should this harmful and dangerous motion proceed.
Proscribing Palestine Action will mean that by the weekend, millions of people living in the UK will have limitations on their freedom of speech. By the weekend, wearing a Palestine Action sticker, badge or T-shirt could result in a terrorism charge. This is a grave misuse of anti-terrorism powers.
The test for Parliamentarians is not whether or not you find Palestine Action’s approach appropriate or inappropriate. These are matters of personal opinion, on which members of Parliament and indeed members of the public will legitimately have their own opinions. What is at stake today is whether or not they are banned as a terrorist organisation, with all the ramifications for human rights that come with that. Members of the public who have no connection to Palestine Action will no longer even be able to fully exercise their freedom of expression on matters of fundamental importance. As such, we urge you to vote against the proscription order.
Yours sincerely
Sacha Deshmukh
Chief Executive at Amnesty International UK
No comments:
Post a Comment