![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights recently published its report (HTML version, PDF version) on the compatibility of the Terrorism Act 2006 with the Council of Europe Convention on the Prevention of Terrorism.
It will make very interesting reading for anyone interested in the 'Glorifying Terrorism" issue. To quote the report's conclusion:
"...we wish in our conclusion to emphasise our view that the combination of the breadth of the definition of "terrorism", the vagueness of "glorification", and the lack of a requirement that there be at least a danger that an act of terrorism will result, makes the encouragement of terrorism offence in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 incompatible with the requirement in Article 12 of the Convention that the establishment of any new offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence be compatible with the right to freedom of expression, and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. In our view the offence as defined in section 1 is likely to have a disproportionate impact on freedom of expression, contrary to the express requirement in Article 12.
We therefore conclude that, on the current state of the law, the Government cannot and should not ratify the Convention because our domestic law is not compatible with it. We draw this matter to the attention of each House."
It will make very interesting reading for anyone interested in the 'Glorifying Terrorism" issue. To quote the report's conclusion:
"...we wish in our conclusion to emphasise our view that the combination of the breadth of the definition of "terrorism", the vagueness of "glorification", and the lack of a requirement that there be at least a danger that an act of terrorism will result, makes the encouragement of terrorism offence in section 1 of the Terrorism Act 2006 incompatible with the requirement in Article 12 of the Convention that the establishment of any new offence of public provocation to commit a terrorist offence be compatible with the right to freedom of expression, and proportionate to the legitimate aim pursued. In our view the offence as defined in section 1 is likely to have a disproportionate impact on freedom of expression, contrary to the express requirement in Article 12.
We therefore conclude that, on the current state of the law, the Government cannot and should not ratify the Convention because our domestic law is not compatible with it. We draw this matter to the attention of each House."
