Gagging order with echoes of Sinn Féin ban aimed at those who undertake activities ‘for the purpose of overthrowing democracy’

This article is more than 5 years old

This article is more than 5 years old

Radical Islamist extremists and neo-Nazis could be banned from making public appearances including on television under a gagging order proposed by the Conservatives with echoes of the broadcast ban that once applied to the voice of Gerry Adams.

Theresa May will announce the measure as part of a widely drawn counter-extremism strategy that is intended to catch so-called hate preachers such as Anjem Choudary, who was released on bail last week after being arrested on suspicion of encouraging terrorism.

The home secretary’s new orders would be aimed at those who undertake activities “for the purpose of overthrowing democracy”, a wide-ranging definition that could also catch a far wider range of political activists.

The “extremist asbos” are reminiscent of the 1980s broadcasting ban under which Sinn Féin spokesmen such as Adams were banned from the airwaves. Actors were used to voice the words of republicans and others with links to paramilitary groups in news reports.

May will also set out proposals to ban non-violent extremist groups that fall short of the current threshold for being banned as terrorist-related organisations.

The strategy is based on proposals that came out of David Cameron’s extremism working party set up following the murder of Lee Rigby in May last year.

The moves to ban extremist but non-violent groups and to introduce extremist asbos were blocked by the Liberal Democrats on freedom of speech grounds and so were not announced when Cameron proposed measures to tackle British jihadists travelling to Syria.

May will announce during the home affairs debate at the Tory conference that the new powers will be included in the party’s manifesto for next year’s election.

In the debate, May and Chris Grayling, the justice secretary, will reaffirm their hostility to the European court of human rights and the Human Rights Act. Grayling will renew his pledge that Britain’s supreme court will no longer be overruled by Strasbourg.

He will also highlight his recent next-term commitment to set up a network of specialist mental health centres in prisons across England and Wales.

May’s extremist disruption civil orders would contain wide-ranging restrictions on individuals who “undertake harmful activities” to spread, incite or justify hatred against people on grounds of race, religion, sexual orientation or disability.

The orders would be issued by a high court judge on an application from the police on the lower legal test of “balance of probabilities” rather than the stronger test of “beyond reasonable doubt”.

The restrictions are expected to include banning individuals from speaking at public events, protests and meetings, having to inform the police in advance of any public event, protest or meeting that they plan to attend, and banning individuals from particular public locations.

May also wants to include restrictions on banned individuals from broadcasting, from associating with named people, and restricting their use of social media or the internet by requiring them to submit in advance any proposed publication to the police.

Banning orders would be time-limited to ensure they were proportional, but breaching the civil orders would be regarded as a criminal offence punishable with a jail term.

The manifesto commitment to banning extremist organisations that fall short of the current test for terrorist proscription comes after a long-term debate since Tony Blair first proposed a ban on the non-violent Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir.

The Home Office has always argued that banning such groups would do more harm than good, but May says that it is now needed. A home secretary’s decision to ban a group would be subject to an immediate review by the high court to ensure it was not “obviously flawed”. A ban would make it an offence to be a member of or to fundraise for the group.