The British government on Thursday, March 14, unveiled a new definition of extremism, an already controversial measure that should allow certain organizations to be blacklisted, depriving them of public funding and interaction with the government and its agents.
In early March, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak described extremism “poison” endangering the country “Law of the Jungle”. He condemned “Extremist Disruption and Shocking Rise in Crime” Since the conflict between Israel and Hamas began on October 7, particularly targeting Islamist movements and far-right groups.
“To protect our democratic values, it is important to strengthen our common ground and be clear and specific in identifying the threats posed by extremism”, The minister responsible for the file defended Michael Gove. The new wording defines extremism in this way “Promoting ideology based on violence, hatred and intolerance”Which is the purpose “To deny or destroy the fundamental rights and fundamental freedoms of others”has “undermining, subverting or altering the British system of parliamentary liberal democracy and democratic rights”or for “Create a permissive environment for others to achieve intentional results” From the first two points.
No effect on criminal law
This “New, more precise definition” That the previous one, dating from 2011, will be used by the government “Make sure they don’t inadvertently provide platforms, funding or legitimacy” For extremist groups, the government clarified in a press release. However, she won’t have it “No effect on existing criminal law”, refers to the text. Following the recommendations of a group of experts, the government will release a list of organizations it considers extremist in the coming weeks.
But the conservative government’s approach has been widely criticised, with some worrying about increased community tensions, or threats to freedom of expression. Church of England spiritual leaders warned on Wednesday that the new definition was dangerous “To disproportionately target Muslim communities, who already face rising levels of hatred.”
“Anything that leads to division between communities is bad for the country”Also condemned was former Labor MP John Mann, now a government adviser on anti-Semitism. “Politics of division does not work electorally”He said, months ahead of the assembly elections which promise to be tough for the conservative party.
Emphasis on ideology
“This definition emphasizes ideas, ideology, and not action, unlike the previous one”, Jonathan Hall argued, Independent Advisor to the Government on Terrorism Matters guardian The definition of 2011 is really necessary “Vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values” To qualify as an extremist for an organization. Distancing himself from the actions, Mr. Hall says he is entitled to question the motives: “What does the government care what the people think unless they act on it?” »
Others warn of possible countermeasures, paving the way for restrictions on freedom of expression. “Suppressing peaceful demonstrations will not help fight extremism, but on the contrary risks fueling it”Ariba Hameed from NGO Greenpeace UK warned Tea guardian. For him, this measure is a risk “Excluding law-abiding protesters from the conversation to make way for those who care less about peace and legality.”
The NGO Human Rights Watch, for its part, described the new definition as:“useless and unacceptable”Believing that she is “Government’s latest attempt to silence critics”. Some conservative media outlets, like tabloids, have presented this fear Rajinda Sandesh for whom “Future in hands of authoritarian government”This definition “Can be used to curtail legal debate.”
