Counter-extremismU.K. government should consider extremism strategy: Parliamentary panel
The Joint Select Committee on Human Rights of the British Parliament said the government should reconsider its counter extremism strategy, use the existing extensive legal framework for dealing with people who promote violence, and introduce new legislation only if it can demonstrate a significant gap. The committee’s report concludes that while there is agreement that tackling terrorism is a priority, there is no agreement about how to combat extremism, particularly since the government is also under a duty to uphold the democratic and human rights which terrorists so often aim to extinguish.
U.K. unclear on details of extremist prevention // Source: theconversation.com
The Joint Select Committee on Human Rights of the British Parliament said the government should reconsider its counter extremism strategy, use the existing extensive legal framework for dealing with people who promote violence, and introduce new legislation only if it can demonstrate a significant gap. The committee’s report concludes that while there is agreement that tackling terrorism is a priority, there is no agreement about how to combat extremism, particularly since the government is also under a duty to uphold the democratic and human rights which terrorists so often aim to extinguish.
The joint committee says that over the past year progress on a forthcoming Counter Extremism Bill appears to have stalled or even gone backwards, with the government retreating from providing any level of detail. The committee recommends that if any new legislation is brought forward it must be informed by evidence as to what works and what simply drives wedges between communities, and that the Prevent strategy must be reviewed.
The report identifies six specific problems which the government will need to address:
The “escalator” approach
The government’s proposals rest on the assumption that there is an escalator which starts with religious conservatism and ends with support for violent jihadism, and that violence is therefore best tackled by curtailing or placing restrictions on religious conservatism. However, it is by no means proven or agreed that religious conservatism in itself correlates with support for violent jihadism. The aim should be to tackle extremism that leads to violence, not suppress views with which the government disagrees.
No clear definition of extremism
If extremism is to be tackled through legal mechanisms, then clarity of definition is essential. Currently the government defines extremism as “the vocal or active opposition to our fundamental values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and the mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”
Alternative (and differently focused) advice from the Department for Education to independent schools and academies uses the phrase “mutual respect and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs.”
