The challenge of terrorist support in the UK

Terrorism is more than violence—it’s the ideology that fuels it. In the UK, the challenge of dealing with individuals and groups who express support for terrorist organisations is a persistent and complex problem.

While Hamas, Hezbollah, and ISIS are all officially banned under the Terrorism Act 2000, that hasn’t stopped people from openly expressing sympathy for them, whether on social media, at protests, or even in professional settings.

Law enforcement agencies work hard to tackle these issues, but they often walk a fine line. How do you balance national security with democratic freedoms? When does free speech cross the line into promoting extremism? These are questions that have no easy answers, but recent cases shed some light on the difficulties authorities face.

Terrorism arrests reach five-year high in the UK

The Legal Landscape

Under UK law, supporting a proscribed terrorist organisation is a criminal offence. This can include displaying their flags, sharing messages of support, or encouraging others to join their cause. Since Hamas was banned outright in 2021 and Hezbollah’s political wing was outlawed in 2019, law enforcement has ramped up efforts to investigate and prosecute individuals who openly express support for these groups.

However, it’s not as simple as charging everyone who voices an opinion. The Counter Terrorism Internet Referral Unit (CTIRU) spends significant time monitoring online content and filtering out what qualifies as genuine extremism from what could simply be misguided political rhetoric. Authorities also consider the intent behind such expressions—was it meant to incite violence, or was it just an uninformed statement? These complexities mean that not every case leads to prosecution, and that, in turn, raises debates over consistency and fairness in enforcement.

A number of recent cases highlight the ongoing struggle to curb extremism while upholding the law:

• The Sarah Cotte Case – In October 2023, Sarah Cotte, a 20-year-old from Camden, delivered a public speech that allegedly celebrated the Hamas-led attacks on Israel on October 7, 2023. Her speech, which was widely shared on social media, was deemed to be promoting a proscribed group. She was arrested and formally charged on March 4, 2025, with her trial scheduled for March 24. This case is likely to set a precedent for how public speeches supporting banned groups are treated in court.
• Khaled Hajsaad’s Protest Conviction – In April 2024, Khaled Hajsaad was arrested in central London after wearing a green headband displaying the Islamic shahada, which prosecutors argued was linked to Hamas. Despite his claim that it was a religious symbol, the court ruled that the imagery could arouse reasonable suspicion of supporting terrorism. He was convicted under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
• The Arrest of a Police Officer – Mohammed Adil, a 26-year-old police officer from Bradford, was sentenced in June 2024 after investigators found that he had been sharing pro-Hamas material online. His case was particularly alarming, as it raised concerns about radicalisation within law enforcement itself.
• The Abu Wadee Case: A Terrorist in the UK? – One of the most alarming recent incidents involved a Palestinian militant known as Abu Wadee, who was flagged as a Hamas affiliate after arriving in the UK on a migrant boat. His arrest sparked widespread concern about border security and whether the UK is doing enough to vet individuals who may pose a threat.

Over the past year, multiple individuals have been arrested for carrying Hezbollah and Hamas flags at protests in London and Manchester. These arrests have reignited debates about whether such acts are legitimate political statements or violations of the UK’s anti-terror laws.

Challenges in Policing Extremism

The police and counterterrorism units are tasked with enforcing the law, but they also have to consider wider social and political implications. Detective Chief Superintendent Gareth Rees, a leading officer in counterterrorism, has pointed out that there is a difference between expressing a controversial opinion and actively inciting terrorism.

One example of the complexities in enforcement comes from my own experience. I reported a social media user expressing open support for Hezbollah to Gwent Police, expecting a straightforward case. However, after their investigation, the Counter Terrorism Crown Prosecution Service (CT CPS) decided not to pursue charges, stating that the post did not meet the legal threshold for a Section 12 offence under the Terrorism Act 2000. Instead, the police told me that they had taken “appropriate action” but did not elaborate on what that entailed. This case reflects just how difficult it is to secure legal convictions for what many might perceive as clear-cut examples of terrorist sympathy.

What’s Next?

The UK’s approach to countering terrorism isn’t just about arrests and prosecutions and is instead, in my view, more about understanding the root causes of radicalisation and preventing it before it escalates.

Recent convictions and ongoing cases show that law enforcement is taking the issue seriously, but challenges remain. The legal system must continuously adapt to deal with new forms of radicalisation, particularly online.

At the same time, the UK must ensure that counterterrorism laws are applied fairly and consistently. Cases like mine—where the police investigated but ultimately decided against pressing charges—show that not every expression of extremist views meets the legal standard for prosecution. This can lead to public frustration and calls for stronger laws, but it also reflects the UK’s commitment to protecting democratic freedoms. The fight against terrorism is as much a battle of ideas as it is a question of law enforcement, and that’s a challenge that won’t be going away anytime soon.