Violent extremism and related criminal offences
Types of conduct and offences leading to prosecution
'Violent extremism' may be defined as:
The demonstration of unacceptable behaviour by using any means or medium to express views which:
- foment, justify or glorify terrorist violence in furtherance of particular beliefs;
- seek to provoke others to terrorist acts;
- foment other serious criminal activity or seek to provoke others to serious criminal acts; or
- foster hatred which might lead to inter-community violence in the UK.
There are a number of offences that can be considered when dealing with violent extremism. (See 'Offences' below). They include offences arising through spoken words, creation of tapes and videos of speeches, internet entries, chanting, banners and written notes and publications.
The main offences employed to date have been soliciting murder and inciting racial hatred.
Free speech
When deciding whether or not to prosecute such offences, we also have to bear in mind that people have a right to freedom of speech. Free speech includes the right to offend. Indeed the courts have ruled that behaviour that is merely annoying, rude or offensive does not necessarily constitute a criminal offence.
The offences that have been successfully prosecuted go well beyond the voicing of an opinion, free speech, or causing offence.
The distinct common thread in terms of criminal prosecutions under the radicalisation umbrella has been a manifested desire to kill, maim or cause a person or group of people immense fear for their personal safety through the threat of (often) extreme violence based on their colour or religion and urging others to take this course.
Prosecutions are not limited to cases of the above, however, and in addition there have been prosecutions for deeply insulting behaviour. This is behaviour which falls short of a desire to commit violence but is nevertheless threatening abusive or insulting and intends to stir up racial hatred.
Racial hatred
Hatred is a very strong emotion. Stirring up racial tension, opposition, even hostility may not necessarily be enough to amount to an offence. Sometimes it may be obvious that a person intends to cause racial hatred; for example, when a person makes a public speech condemning a group of people because of their race and deliberately encouraging others to turn against them and perhaps commit acts of violence. Usually, however, the evidence is not so clear-cut and we may have to rely upon people's actions in order to prove their intentions.
If we are not able to prove that the accused intended to stir up racial hatred, we have to show that, in all the circumstances, hatred was likely to be stirred up, not simply liable or possible.
The offence on inciting religious hatred is on the statute books but has not been brought into force.
Offences that could be considered
Offences that could be considered include:
- Treason (Desiring death of the monarch, levying war against the Queen, giving aid and comfort to enemies of the state,)
- Soliciting Murder: s.4, Offences against the Person Act 1861 (Encouraging or persuading any person to murder any other person)
- Incitement to commit acts of terrorism overseas: s. 59, Terrorism Act 2000
- Incitement to disaffection: Various Acts
- Inciting racial hatred - Part III Public Order Act 1986 (as amended by the Racial & Religious Hatred Act 2006)
- Sedition and Seditious Libel (inciting hatred or contempt and violence against the state and its institutions)
- Inviting support for proscribed organisation: s.12, Terrorism Act 2000
- Terrorist financing offences S15-18 Terrorism Act 2000
- Encouragement of terrorism: s. 1, Terrorism Act 2006
- Dissemination of terrorist publications: s.2, Terrorism Act 2006
- Offences of encouragement and dissemination using the internet
- Distributing, showing playing or possessing a recording, with intent to stir up racial hatred: s. 21 - 23, Public Order Act 1986
Recent successful prosecutions
Abu Hamza
On Tuesday 7th February 2006, Abu Hamza was convicted of 6 counts of soliciting to murder, 2 counts of using threatening words or behaviour likely to stir up racial hatred, one count of possessing threatening recordings and one count of possession of a document likely to be useful to a terrorist.
He was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment.
Soliciting to murder
These counts related to his speeches. The defendant frequently preached at the Finsbury Park Mosque in London until the Mosque was closed in 2003. Some of these talks or sermons were recorded and sold or distributed on video and audio cassette tape. The defendant also gave talks at other locations, such as in community centres. A search of the defendant's home address revealed that he was in possession of a large number of audio and video recordings.
The content of the defendant's speeches at the public meetings, as recorded on tape, demonstrated violent hostility to certain classes of people. In particular:
- A video recorded speech advocating the killing of those who do not believe in the Islamic faith. The defendant emphasised the importance of 'fighting' and identifies those who are legitimate targets. He stated that 'there is no drop of liquid loved by Allah more than the liquid of blood in the cause of Allah' whether this is achieved by a Serb, a Jew or any enemy of Allah. He emphasises the importance of using the 'sword' in the cause of Allah.
- A speech advocating the killing of non-believers. The defendant addresses whether killing is 'haram' or 'halal'. He stated that it was acceptable to kill a non-believer, even for no reason.
- A speech advocating the killing of non-believers in which he stressed that Allah rewards those who make an effort to fight. He illustrated this by saying 'productive, productivity, this one he killed seven, this one he killed one, this one he got killed before he killed, praise be to Allah. They all get rewarded according to their intention'. The defendant stated that fighting is obligatory even though it may be disliked. The defendant also expounds some rules of fighting.
- A speech providing 'rules' of killing those who do not believe in the Islamic faith. The defendant stated that suicide bombing is a legitimate form of Jihad and is a form of martyrdom.
- A speech advocating the killing of those who hindered 'Allah's rule or 'ascribed to corruption'. He stated that this evil would not be removed until such people are killed.
Threatening words likely to stir up racial hatred
- This included a speech advocating the killing of Jewish people in which the defendant stated that Allah will send people to torture and humiliate them until judgment day and that is why He sent Hitler for them.
- Speeches describing Jewish people describing them as sons of monkeys and pigs. The defendant advocated the killing of them. It included references to Jewish people controlling the US and UK Governments. He endorsed the jihad of 'the gun and the bomb'.
- Speeches stating that the Jews had insulted Allah and deserved to be killed and describes them as being 'the most tight people on Earth' and 'dirty monkeys'.
- (The possession of a terrorism document charge related to an "Encyclopaedia of Afghani Jihad" which included information about methods of killing, how to manufacture and use explosives and explosive devices and the use of handguns)
Abdullah El-Faisal
On 24th February 2003, Abdullah El-Faisal was convicted of two counts of soliciting to murder, two counts of using threatening words and behaviour and one count of distributing threatening abusive or insulting recordings of sound.
He was sentenced to a total of 9 years imprisonment (reduced to 7 on appeal).
The defendant is a cleric who in his sermons solicited others to murder. These sermons were recorded onto audiotapes and videotapes, which were then distributed to specialist shops and were available for sale to members of the public.
From the vast quantity of tapes seized by the Police, eight of the most graphic and offensive were the subject of the Public Order Act prosecution. Below are some examples from those sermons.
- Jihad Dat:
'Before continuing let us define the word Jihad – whenever Allah used the word Jihad in the Koran it means to kill the Kaffirs...That's the legitimate meaning of Jihad'.
- Jihad:
'Is there any peace treaty between us and Hindus and Indian? No, so you can go to India and if you see a Hindu walking down the road you are allowed to kill him and take his money'.
- The Rules of Jihad
'All of you have to go for Jihad training and to be a soldier. Islamically speaking, the moment you hit 15, on your 15th birthday you are a soldier.....The moment you are 15 years old you have become a soldier....If you did well in your training you were an excellent shooter and you were excellent in flying a plane or driving a tank and they said alright little brother we need you on the front line in Afghanistan you have to go even though you have a home a wife and 4 children.'
- Declaration of War
'It is incumbent upon us Muslims to remind the believers of the importance of killing these disbelievers, finding them and killing them and to remind the believers that they are our greatest enemies.'
- vi & vii No Peace with the Jews, Jewish Traits & Them v Us
These tapes include many attacks on Jewish people.
Stephen Dempsey
Mr Dempsey faced 11 counts of publishing threatening material with intent to stir up racial hatred.
Upon conviction he asked for 33 similar offences to be taken into consideration and received a 3 year prison sentence.
- The offences all related to hand written notes discovered by members of the public. These notes/letters had been glued to bridges near to a school, glued into popular TV listing magazines within a town centre shop, books which had been written in and then placed back onto shop displays, left in phone boxes, next to bus stops and notes left in envelopes attached to gates and fences of private dwellings.
- The majority of the notes discovered were purported to be from 'The Brothers of Islam', some from the 'Brothers of Africa'. The contents of all these letters and notes described very disturbing and inflammatory scenarios. Common themes within these described how "in America white women wore strappy high heeled shoes whilst they watch a black man crying choking to death in a white man's gas chamber." Other notes described how they would "love to slice open the stomach of heavily pregnant white women before stamping on the foetus".
- On the day of the bombings in London and thereafter the intensity of the letters grew and referred to "whites dying"
- In addition to all this the material detailed extreme prejudice towards black people, Chinese and Jewish people.
Cartoon Protesters
On February 3rd 2006, there was a demonstration in Central London by members of Al Ghurabaa a group within the Islamic community to protest against the publication of cartoons depicting Mohammed armed with a bomb. The protest had no permission and no organisation. The chants and placards were considered by a large section of the public to be offensive and the defendants were later arrested and charged with either soliciting to murder or stirring up racial hatred contrary to section 18(1) of the Public Order Act, (or both).
Four defendants were charged and convicted as set out below.
All four were sentenced on 18 July 2007.
- Rahman
- Saleem
- Javed
- Muhid
During the protest this defendant made a speech in which he called for British soldiers to come back in body bags; he called for another 9/11 in Denmark another 9/11 in Spain in France and all over Europe. He chanted "Bomb, Bomb France. Nuke, Nuke France."
0n 9th December 06 he was convicted of stirring up racial hatred. The jury failed to reach a verdict on solicitation to murder; he was convicted at the retrial. He was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment on the solicitation to murder with 3 years concurrent on the incitement.
This defendant was chanting during the demonstration phrases such as: 'Democracy go to hell. Freedom go to hell. UK you must pay. Sharia is on its way. 7/7 on its way. UK you will pay: Bin Laden on his way'.
On 1st January 2007, he was found guilty of a count of using threatening abusive or insulting words and behaviour and was sentenced in July to 4 years imprisonment. This was reduced on appeal on the 30th October 2007 to 30 months.
This concerns a speech calling those who insulted Islam the enemies of Allah, who have launched a crusade against Islam and the Muslims....who have declared war against the Muslim Nation for which they will pay a heavy price. ...take lessons from Theo Van Gough and the Jews of Khyber.
He chanted: 'Denmark you will pay, with your blood
There is no God but Allah. Jihad is the way to Allah
Democracy hypocrisy go to hell.
Bomb, bomb Denmark. Bomb, bomb USA
Denmark watch your back, Zarqawi coming back'.
There was also a leaflet found in his flat entitled "Kill them by their sword of wherever they are."
On 5th January 07, he was convicted of one count of soliciting murder and one count of inciting racial hatred and received 6 years imprisonment for soliciting murder and 3 years concurrent for inciting racial hatred. These sentences were also reduced on appeal, on the 30th of October 2007, to 4 years and 2 years concurrent.
Muhid was seen to be carrying posters into the Mosque stating "Europe U will pay 3/11 on its way".
During the demonstration, he was carrying a placard reading 'Annihilate those who insult Islam'.
On 7th March 2007, Muhid was convicted of 2 counts of soliciting to murder and was sentenced in July to 6 years imprisonment, reduced on appeal, on the 30th of October 2007 to 4 years.
Neil Martin
On 4 August 2005, a week after the murder of Anthony Walker, Neil Martin accessed the condolences page of a website set up to commemorate the teenager. Using the pseudonym 'Genuine Scouser' he posted a number of highly offensive, racist messages that were removed some hours later by the website administrator.
They included the phrases:
- 'black cunt nigger coon shit shifting slave boy bastard...';
- 'damn black bastards reproduce like rabbits anyway'
- 'his family should be put on the banana boat and shipped back to work the fields, and if they complain whip the coons to within an inch of their lives... they are second class people... (they have no) feelings...niggers are here to serve us';
Neil Martin was prosecuted for inciting racial hatred.
After entering guilty pleas Martin was sentenced on 6 October 2006 by the Recorder of Liverpool to 2 years 8 months imprisonment in respect of this offence.
He was also sentenced to 6 months imprisonment for thirty-three offences of Making Indecent Photographs (contrary to s1 of the Protection of Children Act 1978), this sentence to be served consecutively
Saleem, Brooks, Hussain, Keeler, Hassan & Muhid
These six defendants made inflammatory speeches both in and outside the Regents Park Mosque on the 9th of November 2004 and it was the content of their speeches which led to prosecution. In March 2006 a recording of the speeches was recovered from a house search, connected with another enquiry and this formed the key exhibit in the prosecution. All were convicted after trial at Kingston Crown Court and were sentenced on the 18th of April 2007. Detailed below is a brief summary of what each said, what they were convicted of and sentenced too.
- Saleem
Saleem was central to the facilitation and organisation of the event, as well as speaking. During the course of the speeches he introduced other speakers and their topics including Brooks on the topic of "jihad" and Hussain on the topic of "fitna".
Key points from his speeches were:
- Talk of the earth being separated into two camps, that of Mohammed and Muslims and Sheik Osama Bin Laden, and that of Satan, Bush and Blair, Christians and Jews.
- Jihad and fighting in the name of Allah and supporting Sheikh Osama and what those who cannot fight can do.
- He spoke of Muslims as one nation who should fight under one flag to the exclusion of all others and that to have allegiances with kaffir (non believers) of any sort makes you one and then your blood will become lawful for the Mujahideen.
- Boycotting products is not a solution to occupation, it is jihad and you should fight them like they fight you.
Convicted of inciting terrorism overseas and sentenced to 3 years and 9 months imprisonment.
- Brooks
The content of the speeches made by Brooks included the following points;
- Identifying the enemies of Muslims as the Jews and Christians and that the whole earth is divided into two camps. The first camp is that of Satan/Bush/Blair and the second camp is that of the most gracious Sheik Osama Bin Laden.
- Asking that people give money to support the Mujahideen and the jihad. To give money for weapons, for tanks, for APG's, for M16's.
- He called for people who work for the Americans in Iraq to be killed if they so much as give an American a glass of water, give them food or clean their vehicles.
- Jihad is to fight. He called for people to fight the British, the American, the Japanese all of America's allies in Iraq and Afghanistan.
- He then calls for people to fight with their money, prepare the jihad, and sponsor the Mujahideen.
Convicted of fundraising for terrorism and inciting terrorism overseas, sentenced to 2 and a half years imprisonment and 4 and a half years, to run concurrently.
- Hussain
The content of HUSSAINS speeches included the following points;
- That he would slaughter George Bush if he were to see him and he had a knife with him.
- Money must be donated to the Mujahideen and not to Muslim aid or other recognised charities.
- He repeated that money donated must be given to Mujahideen.
- He calls for support for 'Osama'
Convicted of fundraising for terrorism and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment.
- Keeler
The content of Keeler's speeches included;
- Identifying two camps, Islam and Bush.
- On a number of occasions he called for people to give money to the Mujahideen or to give money to Osama bin Laden.
- He also called for people to physically go and fight in the Jihad and to support the brothers in Iraq or Afghanistan.
- Also asked that people actually give their money to a person not put it into a collection box.
- Brothers we should be proud of 9/11.
- Makes reference to Ken Bigley (who was kidnapped and be-headed in Iraq) and the fact that he went there to help the US and British Army.
Convicted of fundraising for terrorism and inciting terrorism overseas, sentenced to 2 and a half years imprisonment and 4 and a half years, to run concurrently.
- Hassan
The content of Hassan's speech included the following points;
- Mentioned several times that people should prepare for training for jihad.
- There is a duty and responsibility to train in the art of weaponry and to train the mind.
- To train to become real soldiers.
- If he got the opportunity he would assassinate Tony Blair.
- Called for Muslim brothers to support and obey the ameer of jihad Osama Bin Laden.
- Hoped that 35 captured American soldiers were slaughtered.
Convicted of inciting terrorism overseas and sentenced to 2 years 9 months imprisonment.
- Muhid
Key points from his speech included the following points;
- Ask Allah to destroy the pigs in Iraq and the UK.
- All your money must go to jihad and to Al Qaeda.
Convicted of fundraising for terrorism and sentenced to 2 years imprisonment.
Saleem and Muhid were also convicted of offences in relation to the Danish cartoon protests and these sentences were ordered to run consecutively to those.
Bilal Mohammed
Mohammed made a living through the sale and distribution of videos and DVD's and was charged with possessing terrorist publications with a view to disseminating them, contrary to section 2 of the Terrorism Act 2006. The charge related specifically to 9 titles in his possession, all of which were pro-jihad propaganda; however he was in possession of other extremist material.
One example of a video with which he was charged was produced by the Al Qaeda production house released to mark the 5th anniversary of 9/11. Its contents were a celebration of that event and showed detailed terrorist techniques whilst calling for recruits to the AQ terrorist cause. It extols the supposed heroism of the perpetrators of 9/11 and showed them reading their wills and explaining their motives, whilst demonstrating their methods and encouraging young men to undergo similar training and follow their examples.
Mohammed predominantly sold the material on market stalls and pleaded guilty at an early opportunity. It was accepted that he himself did not plan any personal involvement in terrorism, however his actions were reckless and young people were specifically targeted for radicalisation.
Mohammed was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment by Leeds Crown Court on the 19th of March 2008 and this was reduced to 2 years on appeal.
Code for Crown Prosecutors
The Code for Crown Prosecutors gives guidance on how we should make decisions about whether or not to prosecute. The Code is a public document. We review the cases referred to us by the police in line with the two tests set out in the Code.
The evidential test
We must be satisfied first of all that there is enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each defendant on each charge. This means that a jury or a bench of magistrates, properly directed in accordance with the law, is more likely than not to convict the defendant of the alleged charge.
For there to be a conviction, we have to prove the case so that the court is sure of the defendant's guilt. If the case does not pass the first test (the evidential test) based on the strength of the evidence, it must not go ahead, no matter how important or serious it may be. We have explained already that not every case that meets the definition of a racist/religious incident will necessarily be prosecuted. There may not be enough evidence for us to be satisfied that a court is likely to convict the defendant.
The public interest test
If the case does pass the evidential test, we must then decide if a prosecution is needed in the public interest. A prosecution will usually take place unless there are public interest factors tending against prosecution which clearly outweigh those tending in favour. When considering the public interest test, one of the factors we should always take into account is the consequences for the victim of the decision whether or not to prosecute, and any views expressed by the victim or the victim's family.
The Code is a public document. Copies are available from CPS Headquarters, from local CPS Offices, or on our website - The Code for Crown Prosecutors