Keir Starmer’s plan to consider widening terrorism laws to include killers such as Axel Rudakubana has been rejected by Britain’s terror watchdog.
Jonathan Hall, KC, an Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, has cautioned against the expansion of terror laws to cover solitary individuals fixated on violence. He expressed concerns that such a move could overwhelm MI5 and counterterrorism officers, potentially leading to excessive limitations on freedom of expression.
In a recently published report, Hall highlighted that deeming every violent eccentric as a potential terrorist might distort the perceived threat level and divert crucial resources away from genuine threats.
Instead of broadening existing laws, Hall suggested the introduction of a new non-terrorist offense termed ‘mass casualty attack-planning’ to address a current legal gap. This gap pertains to cases involving lone offenders like Nicholas Prosper, who, despite planning a school shooting, cannot be prosecuted under current laws for plotting a large-scale massacre.
His review also calls on police chiefs to provide more information in the wake of attacks, saying silence allows disinformation and allegations of a cover-up to spread.
In the wake of the Southport attacks, Sir Keir said he would consider changing terrorism laws to include perpetrators who commit violence for the sake of violence, expanding the current definition which requires offenders to have a terrorist ideology.
After Rudakubana pleaded guilty in January to the murder of three children at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class, the Prime Minister said Britain was now seeing ‘acts of extreme violence perpetrated by loners, misfits, young men in their bedroom, accessing all manner of material online, desperate for notoriety’.
After Rudakubana pleaded guilty in January to the murder of three children at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class, the Prime Minister said Britain was now seeing ‘acts of extreme violence perpetrated by loners, misfits, young men in their bedroom, accessing all manner of material online, desperate for notoriety’
Keir Starmer’s plan to consider widening terrorism laws to include killers such as Axel Rudakubana has been rejected by Britain’s terror watchdog
He characterised the attack as ‘violence clearly intended to terrorise’, adding: ‘If the law needs to change to recognise this new and dangerous threat, then we will change it – and quickly.’
But Mr Hall warned changing the law would overload MI5 and counter terrorism police, as they would have to tackle ‘individuals who organised football-related violence’ and serial killers like Lucy Letby if the terror remit was expanded.
‘Any family member whose loved one was murdered by a violent fantasist or psychopath would have reason to ask why Counter Terrorism Police and MI5 were not monitoring the individual and preventing the attack,’ he added.
His report found that existing terror laws are already unwieldy: ‘The definition of terrorism can be compared to a tugboat pulling a container ship that gets heavier every year.’
Expanding the definition would ‘increase the possibility of inaccurate use and, in theory, abuse’ and could have a chilling effect on freedom of expression, he said.
‘For example, any person who glorified ‘extreme violence’ would be at risk of arrest and prosecution as a terrorist.
‘People swapping violent war footage would be at risk of encouraging terrorism, resulting in unacceptable restrictions on freedom of expression,’ he added.
The review commissioned by the Home Secretary concluded: ‘Redefinition would alter the landscape.
Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Jonathan Hall, KC, has warned that expanding terror laws to include loners fixated on violence would overwhelm MI5 and counter terrorism officers and could result in ‘unacceptable restrictions on freedom of expression’
‘It would risk major false positives – the prosecution of people who by no stretch of the imagination are terrorists – and extend terrorism liability into novel terrain…The risk of unintended consequences through rushed reform is extremely high.’
Mr Hall acknowledged some offenders are seeking notoriety and act from ‘purely personal motives’ because they want to be the ‘next Jack the Ripper’, adding that it makes ‘good sense’ not to treat them as terrorists.
He referenced the case of Nicholas Prosper, 19, who murdered his mother and two siblings and was on his way to carry out a mass shooting at his old primary school when he was stopped by police.
Mr Hall said it was ‘foreseeable’ that school shootings may inspire copycats ‘most likely amongst the cohort of isolated often bullied teenagers with poor mental health, neurodivergence or personality disorder for whom grudges and grievances become reasons for violence,’ but ‘few’ of those are terrorists.
His proposed new law to criminalise the planning of a massacre, which would carry a potential life sentence, could mean higher punishments for offenders.
Elsewhere in the report, Mr Hall called for police to be more open to counter disinformation and conspiracy theories.
He warned: ‘In the digital era, if the police do not take the lead in providing clear, accurate and sober details about an attack like Southport, others will.’
Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, was among the three little girls killed in the attack in SouthportÂ
Police in front of protesters in Nottingham on August 3, 2024 after the Southport killings
A Government Spokesperson said: ‘The horrific attack in Southport last July cost the lives of three young girls and left others with life-long physical and emotional damage. We have pledged to not only get justice for the victims and their families, but also bring about the changes needed to prevent such a horror from happening again.
‘Today’s report is an important step in that search for answers, and tackle horrific acts driven by a fixation on extreme violence.
‘As the Prime Minister said at the time, if the law needs to change, we will change it and, on the back of today’s report, we will fix the legislation to close the gaps identified.
‘We also agree that we must look at how social media is putting long-established principles around how we communicate after an attack like this under strain. We must look again at this to be able to tackle misinformation head on. Counter Terror Police are already considering this issue, and we have asked the Law Commission to conclude its own review into the rules around Contempt of Court as soon as possible.
‘The wider Public Inquiry in the Southport tragedy will soon be set up to get the country the answers we need.’
