UK state threats bill could pull British journalists into terror prosecutions – experts

The national security (state threats) bill, designed to allow the UK government to label state-backed groups as terrorist organisations, is being rushed through parliament this week. Photograph: Geza Kurka/Alamy View image in fullscreen The national security (state threats) bill, designed to allow the UK government to label state-backed groups as terrorist organisations, is being rushed through parliament this week. Photograph: Geza Kurka/Alamy UK state threats bill could pull British journalists into terror prosecutions – experts Two independent reviewers of terrorism legislation call for safeguards for NGOs and journalists before bill becomes law this week British foreign correspondents could be at risk of prosecution if they use sources within state-backed groups in countries such as Iran under national security legislation being rushed through parliament this week. David Anderson, the UK’s former independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has warned that unless the bill is amended it could accidentally pull journalists working in danger-zone countries into prosecutions for terrorism. The new anti-terror powers are designed to allow the UK government to label state-backed groups as terrorist organisations, enabling them to ban groups such as Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). EU designates Iran’s Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organisation Read more The legal change, which is expected to complete its final parliamentary stages this week, would also create new criminal offences for people who “support, assist and obtain material benefits” from groups formally listed as state-supported threats. However, there are concerns that the national security (state threats) bill would in practice go beyond its main aim of targeting proxies, and could end up penalising foreign correspondents as well. Home Office guidance suggests that journalists are protected, but Lord Anderson said those protections were not explicit in the bill. “The bill seems to have been pulled together in a hurry, with mooted safeguards for NGOs and journalists largely absent from its text,” the peer told the Guardian. “That needs to be put right early this week, before the bill becomes law.” Under the legislation, material benefits include not just financial benefits but also information. It would be an offence both to “obtain, accept and retain” this material benefit but also to “agree to accept” it – and there is no “reasonable excuse” defence for either. Jonathan Hall, Anderson’s successor as independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, has also argued for the law to be amended, extending the “reasonable excuse” defence to cover information. The government has not accepted his recommendation. “There are obvious concerns here for anyone whose legitimate business might cause them to have contact with a designated body or those in a position to give information on its behalf,” Anderson said in a briefing note. “It would place in potential jeopardy a charit