Advertising helps fund our podcasts, but we know some people would prefer the shows without

adverts. If that's you, why not support us on Patreon? You'll get every episode without

interruptions, and you'll be helping independent podcasting to thrive. Follow the link in the

show notes to find out more.

Hello and welcome to The Bunker. I'm Gavin Esler.

What makes a terrorist group?

How violent must that group be in the eyes of the law or of lawmakers? Or is violence not always necessary if that group is disruptive in some other way?

Three days after activists from Palestine Action allegedly damaged two British military aircraft with spray paint, claiming Britain is, quote,

an active participant in the Gaza genocide and war crimes, British Home Secretary Yvette

Cooper responded. She announced that a draft prescription order under anti-terrorism laws

would be laid before Parliament next week. That would make it illegal to be a member of or invite

support for Palestine action. For a sense of what such an order might do, why the government may think it necessary,

and in the hope of understanding what makes a terrorist group,

I'm joined by Lee Jarvis, Professor of International Politics at Loughborough University.

Professor Jarvis's research focuses on security challenges such as terrorism and radicalization. Lee, welcome to the

bunker. Thank you for having me. Now, under English law, is there a clear definition of what a

terrorist group might actually be? It's a really good question. There is a definition of terrorism

within English law. We find it in the Terrorism Act 2000.

This is a large and the key piece of counter-terrorism legislation within the United Kingdom's approach to countering terrorism.

And within that act, there are two key components of what constitutes terrorism.

The first is that there must be the use or threat

of action designed to influence the government or intimidate the public. And secondly, that that

...