 Not a magic wand? Proscription and the ritual of parliamentary scrutiny Lee Jarvis[1] and Tim Legrand [2] 1 School of Politics, Philosophy, Language and Communication Studies, University of East Anglia, Norwich: 2 National Security College, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University, Canberra:

Proscription  Proscription powers:  Render specific terrorist groups illegal within a designated territory  Criminalise support for and membership of proscribed groups  The Home Secretary has the power to proscribe an organisation:  ‘…if it commits or participates in acts of terrorism, prepares for, promotes or encourages terrorism or is otherwise concerned in terrorism’ (Terrorism Act 2000)  As of May 2016:  66 ‘international terrorist organisations proscribed in the UK  14 in Northern Ireland, under previous legislation

Politics of proscription  Primarily legal scholarship:  Impact on liberal democracy/citizenship/communities  Use of proscription for purposes unrelated to counter-terrorism  Symbolic ends of proscription:  Conjuring a ‘tangible’ foe to target  Yet:  Existing research is comparatively sparse  Focus on questions of ethics and effectiveness  Symbolism of proscription largely limited to its outcomes.

Politics and ritual  Our argument:  Parliamentary debate on proscription operates as political ritual  Sheds light on:  The preclusion of debate and lack of opposition  Inevitability of outcome: proscription never denied  Importance of Parliamentary debate on this issue  Subtle mechanisms of power in Parliament.  4 features of political ritual  Orchestration  Constitutivity  Sedimentation  Performativity

Orchestration: rituals organize symbols and beliefs Rituals trigger specific sequences and events, and proceed against a pre-configured template towards a predicted outcome. A. Fixed authority, time and actors proscription occurs in Parliament’s specific, pre-defined time and place to which a particular cast of actors alone have physical access, though it is ‘performed’ to a wider audience. B. A core script conforms to a structured inter-personal interaction, which is scheduled and carefully policed by a key actors C. Respect for the ritual ‘an important power’ (Blears 2005b); a ‘very serious matter’ (McNulty 2006) D. A predetermined outcome "Any proscription order should therefore be taken very seriously. For that reason, successive Governments have attempted to ensure that there is cross-party parliamentary support for proscription" (Johnson, 2014b).

Constitutivity: Rituals constitute forms of reality Constitution of reality through the interplay of beliefs and symbols. a.Consensus on what proscription is/does ' there is not much doubt that [proscription] has great value in disrupting the activities of terrorist organisations’ (Bassam 2005b). b.Consensus on proscription’s necessity, and alignment with liberal values ' The decision to proscribe an organisation is not taken lightly. It entails building a case that meets the legal test under the 2000 Act, and which is examined by officials in the Home Office and other Government Departments. That case is assembled over many weeks and months as the evidence is brought forward and collated’ (Hanson 2010).

Sedimentation: rituals reinforce via repetition In their unvarying reiteration over time, rituals reinforce and solidify realities: Historically, rituals maintain links with the past by remaining internally consistent and ‘only infrequently depart from the expectations of actors and scripts (Alexander, 2006, p.41). Each order is introduced by the Minister, who either begins with or includes a brief description of the power, criteria for its usage, and consequences for newly- designated groups. Repeated near verbatim in House of Lords The proscribed organisations fall within criteria of which it will be useful to remind hon. Members. They are specified in the definition of terrorism provided in the Terrorism Act 2000, which refers to those who commit or participate in acts of terrorism, prepare for terrorism, promote or encourage it or are otherwise concerned with it. The factors spelt out alongside the original decision a year last February were as follows: consideration by the Home Secretary of the nature and scale of the organisations; the specific threat to the UK or British nationals overseas; and the presence and support of the international community. It is the support of the international community and the threat to our citizens overseas that we have weighed very carefully indeed, along with other factors, in proscribing the four groups (Blunkett 2002b).

Performativity: rituals perform and transmit realities Ritual as the combination of perlocutionary and illocutionary efforts that together ‘produce ontological effects, that is, that work to bring into being certain kinds of realities’ (Butler, 2010, p.147). Perlocutionary: The attempt to extirpate an organisation involves its creation and permanence in law: paradoxically, its continuing existence is cemented by the very power that seeks to vanquish it. Illocutionary: the explicit invocation of proscription's symbolisms to shape how terrorism generally, and the proscribed specifically, is perceived: ' The proscription of Hezbollah’s military wing will contribute to making the United Kingdom a hostile environment for terrorists and their supporters. It will signal our condemnation of the support that Hezbollah provides to those who attack British and other coalition forces in Iraq, as well as Iraqi civilians. It will support our international partners in disrupting terrorist activity in the occupied Palestinian territories, and it will also send a strong message that the United Kingdom is not willing to tolerate terrorism either here or anywhere else in the world' (West 2008 ).

Conclusion Rituals play an ontological role in constructing reality and a proselytising role in transmitting particular (versions of) reality excluding others and reinforcing particular value-systems Ritual reveals subtle dimensions of power by limiting or shaping cognition of those involved in, or addressed by, rituals: ‘the values and norms of ritual actions may be so axiomatic as to preclude the actor from seeing it in relation to either part or all of society’ (Gusfield & Michalowicz, 1984, p.421)

Thanks for listening!  Related work:  Legislating for Otherness: Proscription powers and Parliamentary Discourse, Review of International Studies 42(3):  Enemies of the State: Proscription Powers and their Use in the United Kingdom, British Politics 9(4):  Contact:  Lee Jarvis:  Tim Legrand: