UK's terror czar says: DON'T jail hate preachers

The Government’s terror watchdog today said introducing tough new laws to tackle hate preachers would be “quite wrong” despite a recent wave of Islamist attacks.

Max Hill QC said that the creation of new criminal offences, including banning orders and extremism disruption orders, backed by potential jail sentences, should not go ahead.

Both measures have been backed by Theresa May and were among “potential new criminal offences to defeat extremism” promised in her manifesto.

But Mr Hill, the Government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, said the law should be targeted only at those who attempt to commit, or do carry out, acts of violence.

Last week, he suggested some returning British Islamic State fighters should be reintegrated into society, rather than prosecuted, as they were “naive”.

In quotes released ahead of a speech in London tonight to the human rights campaign group Justice, Mr Hill said: “We do not, and should not, criminalise thought without action or preparation for action.

"Whilst we can all agree that there should be nowhere for real terrorists to hide, we should also agree that legislating in the name of terrorism when the targeted activity is not actually terrorism would be quite wrong.”

There are widespread fears about the role played by extremist clerics in creating an anti-Western atmosphere, which inspires others to carry out attacks.

Among the most notorious is Anjem Choudary, who was jailed last year for inviting support for IS after 10 failed attempts to bring him to justice.

His supporters have included London Bridge attacker Khuram Butt and Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, who murdered Fusilier Lee Rigby in 2013.

Mr Hill said: “Thought with steps towards action can be terrorism. Thought without action or preparation for action may be extremism, but it is not terrorism.

"At least, this is where I hold the dividing line. Whether others agree is a matter of debate. You will recall the proposals for banning orders, extremism disruption orders and closure orders. If any or all of them make a reappearance, that will be evidence, for me, of the creation of criminal sanctions, formal consequences which fall on the wrong side of the divide.”

Mr Hill also urged ministers to speak to a wider range of Muslims, including those with whom they did not agree, and criticised calls for them “to ‘do more’ to fight extremism” without spelling out what that should involve.

The idea of creating offences to tackle hate preachers first emerged after the murder of Fusilier Rigby in London.

The then-prime minister, David Cameron, set up a taskforce to consider ways of stopping their influence.

It proposed measures including banning orders, extremism disruption orders and closure orders, which would allow premises used by extremists to be shut, and make it easier to restrict the activities of individuals and organisations.

As Home Secretary, Mrs May included the ideas in a counter-extremism strategy in late 2015.

This said laws would be introduced to “ban extremist organisations that promote hatred and draw people into extremism” and “restrict the harmful activities of the most dangerous extremist individuals”. Mrs May also vowed to use the law to “restrict access to premises which are repeatedly used to support extremism”.

The Prime Minister promised in this year’s Conservative manifesto to consider introducing the measures.

In June she reiterated her desire for tighter curbs, saying there has been “too much tolerance of extremism in our country”.