My Lords, this order was laid before the House on 30 June. I am grateful to the House for its consideration of this draft order, which will see three distinct groups proscribed. They are Maniacs Murder Cult, Palestine Action and the Russian Imperial Movement. The proscription of these three organisations will reaffirm the UK’s zero-tolerance approach to terrorism, regardless of its form or underlying ideology.

It may be helpful to noble Lords if I first set out some background to the power of the proscription order. To proscribe an organisation, the Home Secretary must reasonably believe that it is concerned with terrorism. This means that an organisation commits or participates in terrorism, prepares for terrorism, promotes or encourages terrorism, or is otherwise concerned with terrorism. Noble Lords will, I am sure, welcome knowing that some 80 terrorist organisations are currently proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000.

Proscription is, rightly, ideologically neutral. It judges an organisation not on its politics but on its actions and the actions that it is willing to deploy in pursuit of its cause. The UK’s definition of “terrorism” was established in law a quarter of a century ago. It has stood the test of time and had extensive scrutiny since.

The legislation currently has three specific limbs. The first is that the use or threat of action must reach a certain level of seriousness, such as serious violence or serious damage to property. The second is that the use or threat must be designed to influence a Government or intimidate the public, or a section of the public. The third is that the use or threat must be made for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause. Successive Independent Reviewers of Terrorism Legislation, a number of whom still sit in this House, have upheld the UK’s terrorism definition as effective and fit for purpose, even as the threat from terrorism has evolved.

Proscription is one of the most powerful counterterrorism tools available to the Government. I reassure the House that any decision to proscribe is taken with great care following rigorous consideration. Jonathan Hall KC, in his report on the operation of the Terrorism Acts in 2022, reaffirmed that principle.

We have three organisations before the House. I turn to the measure and shall speak to the proposed additions to the list of proscribed organisations in the order in which they are taken.

First, Maniacs Murder Cult, also known as “MMC”, is an insidious, white supremacist, neo-Nazi organisation that operates online and across borders. It aims to encourage individuals to engage in acts of violence against people it perceives as anti-social, including homeless people, drug addicts and migrants—all to further its ideology and degrade human society through violence. The Government have assessed that MMC commits, prepares for, promotes and encourages acts of terrorism. MMC members and leaders have claimed a number of violent attacks globally that were committed in pursuit of the group’s aims. MMC supplies instructional material that could increase the capability or motivation of an aspiring attacker, including a guide that provides information on how to attack someone fatally with a knife and use a vehicle as a weapon. Members and non-members share MMC’s material online, including videos of violent attacks, to encourage further violence in support of its ideology.

I regret to the tell the House that on 22 May, a 21 year-old Georgian national considered to be one of MMC’s leaders, who is known as “Commander Butcher”, was extradited to the United States—by regret, I mean that we have go to the extent of extraditing somebody—and is set to stand trial in New York for soliciting hate crimes and acts of mass violence. In the indictment, he is alleged to have recruited individuals online to promote MMC’s ideologies by committing acts of murder, arson, bombing and mass poisoning in New York, targeted specifically at members of ethnic minority groups, homeless people and Jewish schoolchildren. I hope that case in New York illustrates that MMC has a truly transnational audience, including in the UK. It does not matter where the leaders of this network are based; if they are capable of inspiring acts of violence and terror they should be dealt with.

Vulnerable individuals, such as minors, are particularly exposed to the horrific material MMC publishes and distributes online. Frankly, the Government will not stand by and allow the terrorist threat and wider societal harms caused by MMC to persist. Proscribing MMC is key to help deter and divert individuals from engaging with MMC’s violent content and will send a clear signal to social media companies to remove MMC’s material from their platforms. The threat posed by MMC must be taken extremely seriously, whether it is inspiring acts of violence against our people or influencing young people to commit those acts. We will not hesitate to take action against groups such as these to keep our country safe.

I turn to the second group, which is Palestine Action. The public attention it has garnered should not be confused with legitimacy; nor should a group formed five years ago be conflated with the legitimate campaign for Palestinian rights and statehood, which has existed in our country—and, indeed, across both Houses of Parliament—for more than five decades.

I want to be clear, and I hope that this will help noble Lords in their consideration: proscription of Palestine Action does not seek to ban protests that support Palestine. There are many ways in which people can continue to lawfully express their support for Palestine without being a member or supporter of Palestine Action.

Freedom of expression and freedom of assembly are cornerstones in our democracy. I have protested; I know of many other Members who have protested against various things in our lives, and we have done so fairly and openly. It is a fundamental right, and this Government will respect and protect those rights. I will always defend the rights of British people to engage in legitimate and peaceful processes and to stand up for the causes in which they believe.

Essential as these rights are, they do not provide a blank cheque for this particular group to seriously damage property or subject members of the public to fear and violence. The attack on Brize Norton on 20 June has understandably provoked widespread shock and anger, but the reality is that this is just the latest episode in Palestine Action’s long history of harmful activity. Palestine Action has orchestrated a nationwide campaign of property damage, featuring attacks that have resulted in serious damage to property and crossed the threshold from direct criminal action into terrorism. Palestine Action members have used violence against people responding at the scene of attacks. For their role in co-ordinated attacks, members of the organisation have been charged with serious offences, including violent disorder, grievous bodily harm with intent, and aggravated burglary, which is an offence involving a weapon. Despite some of the rhetoric to the contrary, the group’s own materials have stated that the organisation is not non-violent. This is echoed in the actions of its members, who have committed atrocious attacks.

The Government have to consider all the evidence, and the Home Secretary and my Honourable Friend Dan Jarvis, the Minister for Security, have concluded that Palestine Action is concerned in terrorism and should be proscribed. I hope that the House will understand that I am not able to comment on specific intelligence or go into details about incidents that are currently sub judice. However, I can provide a summary of the group’s activities, and it is right that I make those positions clear to the House.

Since its inception in 2020, Palestine Action has orchestrated and enacted a campaign of direct criminal action against businesses and institutions, including key national infrastructure and defence firms that provide services and supplies to support our efforts in Ukraine, NATO, our Five Eyes allies and the UK defence enterprise. Over time, but most importantly and notably since the start of 2024, Palestine Action’s activity has increased in frequency and severity. Its targets have broadened to include financial firms, charities, universities and government buildings. Its methods have become more aggressive, with its members demonstrating a willingness to use violence. Some of Palestine Action’s own materials state: “We are not a non-violent organisation and we have specific targets”. The group has a footprint in all 45 policing regions in the United Kingdom, and has pledged to escalate its campaign.

This pattern of activity cannot be allowed to continue. In applying the legislative framework, the Government assess that Palestine Action commits acts of terrorism. In several attacks, Palestine Action has committed acts of serious damage to property, with the aim of progressing its political cause and intimidating and influencing the public and the Government. These include attacks on Thales in Glasgow in 2022 and, last year, on Instro Precision in Kent and Elbit Systems UK in Bristol. In such attacks, Palestine Action members have forced entry on to premises armed with a variety of weapons and damaged or demolished property, causing millions of pounds-worth of criminal damage.

As the House will have heard, Palestine Action members have used violence against individuals who were responding at the scene at the time. During Palestine Action’s attack against Thales and the defence factory in Glasgow in 2022, the group caused over £1 million of damage, including parts of essential submarine materials. Palestine Action has caused panic among staff, who feared for their safety as pyrotechnics and smoke bombs were thrown in an area when staff were evacuating from that area. The sheriff who passed custodial sentences for the perpetrators said:

“Throwing pyrotechnics into areas where people are being evacuated could hardly be described as non-violent”.

The Government have also assessed that Palestine Action prepares for terrorism. The organisation has provided practical advice to assist its members with conducting significant levels of property damage at targets across the UK to further its cause. Let me give noble Lords an example. Palestine Action released an “undercover manual” which encourages its members to create small groups or cells and provides guidance about how to conduct activity against private companies and government buildings. The manual explains how to operate covertly and evade arrest, and provides a link to a website also created by Palestine Action that contains a map of target locations across the United Kingdom. The Government have assessed that Palestine Action promotes and encourages terrorism. This includes glorification of its attacks involving serious property damage on social media.

Palestine Action’s attacks are not victimless crimes. As I have mentioned, employees have experienced physical violence, intimidation and harassment. They have been prevented from entering their place of work. The extortion and real-world costs cannot be continuously absorbed by individuals and companies acting lawfully—all of them in the national interest. I have to say that we would not tolerate this activity from organisations if they were motivated by Islamist or extreme right-wing ideologies, and therefore I cannot tolerate it from Palestine Action.

By implementing this measure, we will remove Palestine Action’s veil of legitimacy, tackle its financial support and degrade its efforts to recruit and radicalise people into committing terrorist activity in its name. Palestine Action is not a legitimate protest group. People engaged in lawful protest do not need weapons. People engaged in lawful protest do not throw smoke bombs and fire pyrotechnics at innocent members of the public. People engaged in lawful protest do not cause millions of pounds of damage to national security infrastructure, including submarines and defence equipment for NATO.

I want to reassure noble Lords that proscribing Palestine Action will not impinge on people’s rights to protest. Those who wish to lawfully protest and express support for Palestine have always been able to and can continue to do so. Nor is this decision related to any UK policy on the Israel-Gaza conflict. The Government have been clear they want an immediate ceasefire and will continue to oppose the expansion of Israel’s operations in Gaza. Rather, proscribing Palestine Action will ban an organisation whose actions have no place in British society and give law enforcement the tools it needs to protect our nation’s security and keep the public safe.

Finally, I turn to the Russian Imperial Movement. The Russian Imperial Movement, or RIM, as I will now call it, is a white supremacist nationalist organisation that seeks to create a new Russian imperial state. The methods that RIM is using to try to achieve those aims threaten UK, Euro-Atlantic and wider international security and prosperity. RIM conducts combat activity via its paramilitary unit, the Russian Imperial Legion, which has fought alongside Russian forces and other pro-Russian right-wing extremist groups in the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict. In doing so, the Government assess that it has committed or participated in acts of terrorism. RIL, as I will now call it, is likely using serious violence and property damage to intimidate Ukrainian opponents into ceding territory to a Russian state, furthering the Russian Imperial Movement’s aims.

The Russian Imperial Movement also prepares for terrorism. It manages a paramilitary training programme known as Partisan, which increases the capability of attendees to conduct terrorist attacks. Its training programme has enabled individuals to perpetrate terrorist attacks in western Europe in the past. The Russian Imperial Movement also maintains relationships with other extreme right-wing terrorist groups. By proscribing RIM, the UK will reinforce our steadfast support for Ukraine and its resistance to Russian aggression, and our commitment to counter future threats from extreme right-wing terrorism in the UK and Europe.

I will finish by reminding the House that the first duty every day of the Government and the Home Office is to keep the country safe. When our collective security and our values are threatened, we must respond accordingly. To maintain confidence in the UK’s counterterrorism framework, we must apply it without bias. Terrorism, in whatever form and driven by whatever ideology it takes, is unacceptable, and we must and will tackle it head-on. I therefore hope, with the explanations I have given, that noble Lords will support the order, but obviously I will listen to the debate and, if required, respond to points raised by Members in due course. I commend the order to the House.