We have had a useful discussion, but one aspect that needs to be emphasised is an echo of yesterday’s discussion on clause 1. It is the fact that it is possible for an individual, as well as an organisation, to fall foul of the provision merely because of a perception on somebody else’s part. We should criminalise the intent of the individual or organisation, not the way in which somebody else might see their actions. Many organisations that try to highlight issues in connection with places such as Palestine or Kashmir will have to tread an exceptionally fine line, and it should not be the business of the House to proscribe their activities simply because somebody else may feel that they have crossed that line.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Alistair Carmichael
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
438 c990-1 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 22:45:15 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275314
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275314
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275314