Britain may have to resort to anti-subversion laws, watchdog warns

Published

1 month ago

May 19, 2025

admin

Britain may need anti-subversion laws to counter threats from states determined to undermine democracy, a government watchdog has said.

Jonathan Hall KC, the independent reviewer of state threat legislation, is due to report this week on using counter-terrorism laws against state interference.

Mr Hall was asked by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper to review whether there were elements of counter-terrorism legislation which could be emulated to address state-based security threats last December.

In particular, he was asked to look at what legal measures would be useful against “highly aggressive state bodies” such as Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

In a speech to the Policy Exchange thinktank on Monday, Mr Hall will say the internet offers intelligence officers a “perfect way of directly recruiting tasking and paying individuals”.

“Young people who might once have been attracted to a terrorist cause are now willing to carry out sabotage for [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s Russia,” he will add in the John Creaney Memorial Lecture.

“They are recruited in exactly the same way, by groups operating on Telegram”, an encrypted messaging app, the reviewer says.

“I am thinking about the measures that may one day be needed to save democracy from itself. What do I mean? I am referring to counter-subversion,” he is set to add.

Counter-subversion was part of MI5’s role in the 1950s and 1970s but fell out of favour, associated with McCarthyism and infiltrations of domestic protest groups by undercover police, Mr Hall says.

New laws may now be needed but they would need to come with legal safeguards.

“If I was a foreign intelligence officer, of course I would ensure that the UK hated itself and its history,” he says in the speech.

“That the very definition of woman should be put into question, and that masculinity would be presented as toxic.

“That white people should be ashamed and non-white people aggrieved. I would promote antisemitism within politics.

“My intention would be to cause both immediate and long-term damage to the national security of the UK by exploiting the freedom and openness of the UK by providing funds, exploiting social media, and entryism.”

Pro-Russia groups find ideological affinity with “lone actors” by posing as “protectors of Christian civilisation” and position Russia as a “true defender of crumbling Western civilisation,” he says.

Foreign intelligence agents could already be using social media as a “delightful playground for wedge issues”.

They could seek to use online “sextortion” tactics to obtain kompromat and force individuals to carry out tasking, while they may also be seeking to meddle in Brexit, Scottish independence or the independence of overseas territories.

They could also sponsor contentious foreign policy issues such as Gaza, or amplify the lie that the Southport killer was a Muslim who arrived on a small boat, Mr Hall says.

They might encourage extreme forms of environmentalism, or policies that would damage adversaries’ economy “or at least sow discord or hopelessness”, the reviewer adds.

Content moderation – removing, blocking, or limiting access to certain content – is “never going to sufficiently address the unprecedented access that the internet accords to impressionable minds,” Mr Hall says.

Legal measures that have proved useful in dealing with domestic terrorist groups may need to be adapted for groups involved in state threats to stop them promoting themselves and inviting support online and offline, he says in the speech.

One answer is the offence of “foreign interference” under the new National Security Act 2023 but proving that a “foreign hand” is at work can be very difficult, Mr Hall says.

Another answer is “social resilience against disinformation” or even “a Cold War mentality that sniffs out subversion”.

“But what if it was necessary to go further? What if it was necessary to investigate, intrusively, the source of funding for protest movements?”

Mr Hall asks if it might be necessary to “bring forward a law, in the interests of national security, banning extremism or subversion”.

He asks if it might be desirable to pass a law banning Muslim Brotherhood candidates from standing in elections.

The Muslim Brotherhood is an Islamist social movement which arose in Egypt in the 1920s but also gave rise to Hamas.

Such laws would be difficult, he acknowledges, because they would have to be based on general principles that apply to individuals equally – such as separatism, hateful extremism, or subversiveness – which have so far eluded politicians.

If such new laws were introduced, they would “need sufficient safeguard in the form of judicial intervention, not cowed by excessive deference to the executive but ready to correct things when they go wrong”, Mr Hall concludes.

Politics

SEC approves conversion of Grayscale’s large-cap crypto fund into ETF

Published

2 hours ago

July 1, 2025

admin

<div>SEC approves conversion of Grayscale's large-cap crypto fund into ETF</div>

Grayscale has slowly narrowed the arbitrage opportunities on its crypto trusts by converting them into exchange-traded funds.

Politics

Chief rabbi condemns BBC’s ‘mishandled response’ to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury – as Bob Vylan issue new statement

Published

3 hours ago

July 1, 2025

admin

Chief rabbi condemns BBC's 'mishandled response' to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury - as Bob Vylan issue new statement

The chief rabbi has described the BBC’s response to anti-IDF chanting at Glastonbury as “belated and mishandled” – as the punk-rap duo involved, Bob Vylan, said the UK government needed to talk about its “criminal inaction”.

Sir Ephraim Mirvis said “vile Jew-hatred” had been aired at the Somerset music festival and it was a “time of national shame”.

Confidence in the BBC’s “ability to treat antisemitism seriously” has been brought to a “new low”, he said in a post on X, adding that “outright incitement to violence and hatred” appeared to be acceptable if it was couched as “edgy political commentary”.

Ordinary people had not only failed to see incitement “for what it is” but had cheered it, chanted it, and celebrated it, he said. “Toxic Jew-hatred is a threat to our entire society,” he added.

Bob Vylan, posting a new statement on Instagram on Tuesday, said they were “not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people”.

Rather, they were for the “dismantling of a violent military machine” – the Israel Defence Forces.

Bob Vylan chanted “death to the IDF” at Glastonbury. As many as 95% of the IDF are thought to be Jewish.

In their statement, the group said they were a “distraction from the story” and that whatever “sanctions” they received would also be a distraction.

Their US visas have been revoked and United Talent Agency, their US representatives, have dropped them.

Referring to the war in Gaza, they claimed the UK government does not want them to ask “why they remain silent in the face of this atrocity”, “why they aren’t doing more to stop the killing” and “feed the starving”.

They added: “The more time they talk about Bob Vylan, the less time they spend answering for their criminal inaction.

“We are being targeted for speaking up. We are not the first, we will not be the last, and if you care for the sanctity of human life and freedom of speech, we urge you to speak up, too.”

It has emerged that Tim Davie, the BBC’s director-general, was at Glastonbury when the duo led chants of “Death to the IDF” which were broadcast live.

The prime minister’s spokesman, asked if the PM had confidence in Mr Davie, said Sir Keir Starmer had “confidence in the BBC”, adding: “The position of the director-general is a matter for the BBC’s board.”

Speaking in the Commons, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said “accountability” was important and it was something she had “impressed upon the BBC leadership”.

She added: “When you have one editorial failure, it’s something that must be gripped. When you have several, it becomes a problem of leadership.”

The cabinet minister said she’d called Mr Davie after Bob Vylan’s set had been broadcast to find out why it had aired, and why the feed had not been cut.

“I expect answers to these questions without delay,” she said.

Meanwhile Dame Caroline Dinenage, chair of the culture, media and sport committee, has written to Mr Davie in relation to the corporation’s Glastonbury coverage.

The committee has said the letter asks about editorial and decision-making processes and whether consideration was given to broadcasting with a delay. It also asks about staffing levels at the festival and contingency planning.

Avon and Somerset Police has begun a criminal investigation and is reviewing footage of both Bob Vylan and Kneecap’s performances at Glastonbury.

The force said a senior detective had been appointed – and it had been contacted by people from around the world.

“We… recognise the strength of public feeling,” it said.

During Kneecap’s set, one member suggested starting a “riot” outside his bandmate’s forthcoming court appearance, before clarifying that he meant “support”. Liam Og O hAnnaidh, also known as Mo Chara, is charged with a terror offence.

Bob Vylan had been due to tour the US before their visas were revoked.

US deputy secretary of state Christopher Landau said action had been taken “in light of their hateful tirade at Glastonbury, including leading the crowd in death chants”.

“Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” he added.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

During Bob Vylan’s set, the duo performed in front of a screen that showed several messages, including one that claimed Israel’s actions in Gaza amounted to “genocide”.

The war in Gaza began after Hamas militants attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 and killed 1,200 people and took about 250 hostage.

Israel’s offensive in Gaza has led to the deaths of more than 56,500 people, according to the Hamas-run health ministry, which does not differentiate between civilians and combatants.

Media watchdog Ofcom has said the BBC “clearly has questions to answer” over the live stream from Glastonbury.

A BBC spokesperson said: “The director-general was informed of the incident after the performance and at that point he was clear it should not feature in any other Glastonbury coverage.”

The broadcaster respects freedom of expression but “stands firmly against incitement to violence”, they said.

They added: “The antisemitic sentiments expressed by Bob Vylan were utterly unacceptable and have no place on our airwaves…

“The team were dealing with a live situation, but with hindsight we should have pulled the stream during the performance. We regret this did not happen.”