Lee Jarvis
Search for other papers by Lee Jarvis in
Current site
Google Scholar
Tim Legrand
Search for other papers by Tim Legrand in
Current site
Google Scholar
The ritual of proscription
Reproducing liberal democracy
in Banning them, securing us?
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

Chapter 7 explores some of the most significant characteristics of parliamentary debates on the proscription or banning of terrorist organisations. These characteristics include, we argue: a remarkably standardised and repetitive framing of proscription; the existence of a core script which is often repeated, with minor alterations, across parliamentary debates; a set of established and identifiable roles that are taken up by participants within these debates (participants who, of course, come and go with the passage of time); repeated arguments around the importance of respecting these debates and their outcomes; and – perhaps most significant of all – a predictable, seemingly near-inevitable, outcome which is known in advance to those parliamentarians present at these debates. These characteristics indicate that proscription debates should be approached not – or, at least, not only or not primarily – as a decision-making exercise in which the outcome is genuinely to be decided. Rather, as a form of contemporary political ritual that reinforces the identities of its subjects by performing that which it claims to represent: liberal democracy. Vital within this, we suggest, is the appearance of dissent amidst broader cross-party consensus on proscription's necessity and legitimacy.

  • Collapse
  • Expand

Banning them, securing us?

Terrorism, parliament and the ritual of proscription


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 149 34 2
Full Text Views 3 0 0
PDF Downloads 3 0 0