Pushing terrorist propaganda 'underground' could make extremists harder to detect, government warned

Watchdog cautions against proposed new laws that would make viewing material a criminal offence

Evidence of terrorist activity 'rarely emerges' from dark web and encrypted channels, watchdog says

Pushing terrorist propaganda “underground” online could make it harder for police to detect radicalisation, the government has been warned.

The Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation’s annual report cautioned against proposed laws to make viewing terrorist material a criminal offence.

Max Hill QC said the move could “push the current abundance of evidence proving terrorist activity online to go offline or underground, into impenetrable places from which clear evidence rarely emerges”.

Efforts to remove material created by Isis and other terrorist groups from mainstream sites and social networks will be “counter-productive if would-be terrorists could still access it”, he said.

“Once this material goes underground, it is harder for law enforcement to detect and much harder for good people to argue against it, to show how wrong the radical propaganda really is,” he added.

The warning came after the government championed efforts by the Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit to remove hundreds of thousands of videos, pictures and social media posts.

Global efforts have largely wiped Isis off Twitter, Facebook and other sites where militants once enjoyed free reign, but have left Telegram and other platforms not engaging with governments untouched.

Max Hill QC has been appointed as the new director of public prosecutions

At the time of writing, each of the posts on the Telegram channel for Isis’ main propaganda agency were being viewed up to 6,000 times and recent court cases have shown the platform to be widely used by terror plotters.

The Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill, which is currently being scrutinised in Parliament, would make accessing terrorist material just once a criminal offence punishable with imprisonment.

Mr Hill warned that policing the internet may interfere with article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights and could see people with a “reasonable excuse” for viewing the posts needlessly dragged to court.

“We should only resort to specialist terrorist legislation in the rare cases when general crime statutes and/or the common law do not provide the solutions required by the police and by prosecutors,” he said.

Police and security officials have also been raising increasing concern about the ability of criminals and terrorists to communicate secretly via end-to-end encryption.

Mr Hill said he has “heard the message” about technological advances which “drive the imperative to intervene as a matter of law enforcement, without which terrorism may thrive unimpeded”.

His wide-ranging report on the operation of Britain’s terror laws in 2017 Isis continues to represent the most significant terrorist threat, but noted the increase in police awareness of extreme far-right activity.

It predicted that a “modest expansion” on the use of Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures (TPIMs) in the near future as extremists are released from prison.

TPIMs are used in cases where someone who is deemed to pose a threat to security cannot be prosecuted or deported, enabling restrictions on where they live, who they associate with, communications and internet access.

Mr Hill recommended that local authorities, including their social services departments, should be appropriately briefed on TPIMS “wherever relevant and necessary, with suitable limitations upon the use of any information provided”.

The report said police had made reasonable and proportionate use of terror laws in 2017, which saw five terror attacks kill 36 victims in London and Manchester.

But Mr Hill said it was “difficult to justify” the mass arrest of 11 people related to the London Bridge ringleader Khuram Butt after one of them had called police to identify him.

And after the attack on Manchester Arena which left 22 dead, a 35-year-old woman was mistakenly arrested because she was in “the wrong place at the wrong time” and has since been compensated by police.

The watchdog called for the government to “learn lessons” on the resources needed for terror investigations, and for police to improve their understanding of arrest and search provisions.

The head of UK counterterror policing, Assistant Commissioner Neil Basu, said the recommendations would be considered.

“Despite ever-increasing demand upon our officers, it is clear that we are using our powers proportionately to effectively combat terrorism in all of its guises and our use of the existing legislation to counter a growing threat from the extreme far-right is also praised in the report,” he added.

Mr Hill said the government should also consider whether to bring state activity into the definition of terrorism following the Salisbury attack.

“The novichok poisonings, and the question of the perpetrators and their origin or sponsorship, have inflamed the issue of what terrorism means, and whether our statutory definition provided by Parliament in 2000 works equally for state terrorism and non-state terrorism,” he added.

“It would be a mistake to allow states to eschew the designation of terrorism for their own misdeeds while allowing them the freedom to apply it broadly to their enemies.”

Mr Hill, who is to leave the role this week to become the director of public prosecutions, urged his successor to continue work on the issue, and to investigate “any wider ramifications of Brexit”.

The Home Office has not yet started advertising for a replacement for Mr Hill, who said “I regret that there will be a gap in oversight”.

Nick Thomas-Symonds MP, Labour’s shadow security minister, called the gap “worrying”.

“The Home Office has known since July at least that they need to appoint a successor for this vitally important role and yet they appear to have done nothing since,” he added. "This is completely unacceptable especially as the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill is currently going through Parliament.

“The Home Office must provide assurances that a new Independent Reviewer will be appointed urgently.”

Sajid Javid, the home secretary, said Mr Hill’s recommendations would be considered fully.

“It’s vital the work the police, security services and government do to keep the public safe from terrorism is underpinned by effective and proportionate legislation,” he added.

“Earlier this year we published our updated counter-terrorism strategy and introduced the Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill which will increase sentencing and other terrorism powers, update terrorism offences and ensure we are able to robustly respond to the new ways in which terrorists operate.”