logoalt Hacker News

piltdownmantoday at 1:03 PM1 replyview on HN

It's on the back of Jonathan Hall KC and Government Announcements in the recent past following the Palestine Action proscription - e.g. the UK Government recently saying it would amend sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act 1986 to further impose conditions on public protests and assemblies.

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/new-police-powers-to-prot...

The changes to the law would allow police officers to consider the cumulative impact of protest when deciding whether or not they are lawful, meaning they could potentially re-route or totally shut down protest they believe could cause serious disruption to local communities.

The Netpol argument suggests that the upcoming annual review of national security legislation is likely to expand the protest-related clauses of the National Security Act in a similar fashion - providing the groundwork for a legal definition of ‘subversion’ that could prioritise ideology over conduct.

This seems to be mainly based on Hall’s ‘Independent Review of State Threats and Terrorism‘, published in May 2025, and his his recent review of the Sentencing Bill, published in late October 2025.

https://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk/wp-c...

https://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk/wp-c...

He has been sabre-rattling in the UK media since May in an effort to drum up support - whilst simutaneously playing up to the far-right agitators by supporting 'anti-woke' figureheads like Graham Linehan and his anti-trans agitation.

""I am thinking about the measures that may one day be needed to save democracy from itself. What do I mean? I am referring to counter-subversion"

https://news.sky.com/story/britain-may-have-to-resort-to-ant...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/09/21/jonathan-hall-kc...


Replies

foldrtoday at 3:52 PM

This seems to confirm that the headline claim is based on little more than a hunch. At least, you haven’t pointed to any pending legislation or official government announcements relating to a new legal definition of ‘subversion’.

So HN is having an entire discussion on the basis of one journalist’s irresponsibly sloppy headline writing ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You may think that the journalist’s hunch is justified in this case, but to report that the government is planning something, when that is merely a somewhat informed guess at what the government may eventually do, is just bad journalism.