TruthOrFake Logo
TruthOrFake
Fact Check: Proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters.

Fact Check: Proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters.

Published June 23, 2025
ByFactChecker 1.1 avatarFactChecker 1.1
✓
VERDICT
True

# Fact Check: "Proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters." ## What We Know Under the **Terrorism Act 2000**, proscription of an or...

Fact Check: "Proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters."

What We Know

Under the Terrorism Act 2000, proscription of an organization can lead to severe legal consequences for individuals who support or belong to that organization. Specifically, sections 11 and 12 of the Act stipulate that it is a criminal offense to belong to or invite support for a proscribed organization, with penalties that can include a maximum of 14 years in prison and/or a fine (GOV.UK). This means that if an organization is proscribed, any support for it—whether material or moral—can result in serious legal repercussions.

The Home Secretary has the authority to proscribe organizations believed to be involved in terrorism, which includes groups that commit, prepare for, or promote acts of terrorism (GOV.UK). The recent declaration of Hizb ut-Tahrir as a proscribed organization is a relevant example, where the Home Secretary noted that anyone who belongs to or invites support for the group could face these penalties (GOV.UK).

Analysis

The claim that proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters is substantiated by the legal framework established in the Terrorism Act 2000. The act clearly outlines the offenses associated with proscribed organizations, including belonging to or expressing support for such groups. The maximum penalty of 14 years is explicitly stated in multiple sources, including government publications and legal analyses (GOV.UK, Counter Terrorism Policing).

Moreover, the reliability of the sources is high, as they are official government documents and statements. The GOV.UK website is the official government portal, which provides accurate and up-to-date information regarding laws and regulations. The information is corroborated by various media outlets, which report on the implications of proscription and the associated penalties (BBC, Reuters).

Critically, while there are discussions about the implications of such laws on civil liberties and free speech, the legal framework itself is clear and unambiguous regarding the penalties for supporting proscribed organizations.

Conclusion

The verdict on the claim that "proscription could lead to 14 years in prison for supporters" is True. The legal framework established by the Terrorism Act 2000 explicitly states that individuals who support or belong to proscribed organizations can face severe penalties, including imprisonment for up to 14 years. This is well-documented in official government sources and supported by recent legislative actions.

Sources

  1. Proscribed terrorist groups or organisations - GOV.UK
  2. Home Secretary declares Hizb ut-Tahrir as terrorists - GOV.UK
  3. Proscription - Wikipedia
  4. Palestine Action group to be banned, home secretary ...
  5. UK government says it will ban pro-Palestinian group after ...
  6. UK to ban campaign group Palestine Action under anti-...
  7. Palestine Action to be proscribed - but what does that mean?
  8. Proscription | Counter Terrorism Policing

Have a claim you want to verify? It's 100% Free!

Our AI-powered fact-checker analyzes claims against thousands of reliable sources and provides evidence-based verdicts in seconds. Completely free with no registration required.

💡 Try:
"Coffee helps you live longer"
✓100% Free
✓No Registration
✓Instant Results

Comments

Leave a comment

Loading comments...

More Fact Checks to Explore

Discover similar claims and stay informed with these related fact-checks

Fact Check: The Trump administration's actions could lead to 1,000 extra fatal overdoses per year.
True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: The Trump administration's actions could lead to 1,000 extra fatal overdoses per year.

Detailed fact-check analysis of: The Trump administration's actions could lead to 1,000 extra fatal overdoses per year.

Jul 16, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️

Detailed fact-check analysis of: PFAS manufacturers 3M and DuPont agreed to pay at least $12.5 billion 💰for their roles in contaminating state landfills and rivers with “forever chemicals.” For over 50 years, they knew that PFAS exposure could be linked to kidney and testicular cancer, but chose to keep the risk hidden from the public. Those affected may be eligible for compensation. Check eligibility for a settlement today with our 1-minute evaluation. ⚡️

Jul 30, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: KATIE JOHNSON: "Mr. Trump had another girl and I dress as maids and pretend to clean the room. The other girl, Maria, was 12 years old. Mr. Trump ordered us to carry out a string of sex acts on each other and on him. After he finished he said "we both could have done better" and then left." (from her sworn affidavit about the 3rd encounter where Trump raped her when she was 13 years old. Her words have never been retracted or debunked. C
Partially True
🎯 Similar

Fact Check: KATIE JOHNSON: "Mr. Trump had another girl and I dress as maids and pretend to clean the room. The other girl, Maria, was 12 years old. Mr. Trump ordered us to carry out a string of sex acts on each other and on him. After he finished he said "we both could have done better" and then left." (from her sworn affidavit about the 3rd encounter where Trump raped her when she was 13 years old. Her words have never been retracted or debunked. C

Detailed fact-check analysis of: KATIE JOHNSON: "Mr. Trump had another girl and I dress as maids and pretend to clean the room. The other girl, Maria, was 12 years old. Mr. Trump ordered us to carry out a string of sex acts on each other and on him. After he finished he said "we both could have done better" and then left." (from her sworn affidavit about the 3rd encounter where Trump raped her when she was 13 years old. Her words have never been retracted or debunked. C

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that
False

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 911 was a false flag. For the first 10 years, I did not think anything other than the official narrative then after being shown a video, a close up video of building number seven coming down and that got me going because it's obvious to me that building seven was was a controlled demolition because the building collapses from the bottom down. The trade centers were unique in that they were designed to withstand the 00:33 impact of a a a jet. From what I understand the the outer skeleton of the building. The outer columns was like a a fish net and you had these inner core columns which was substantial thick steel beams to withstand four or five times what the loads were. Got it. The engineers always over design a building. No steel frame building has ever collapsed before or since 9/ eleven. So that should say something right there. And it said that building seven it was 01:05 aggressive collapse that it was caused by fire but progressive collapse unlike the twin towers, the twin towers collapse from the top down. That's a progressive collapse. Sure. Floor by floor by floor. But if you look at the videos of building seven collapsing, it collapses uniformly, it's collapsing from the bottom, the building stays intact all the way to the bottom of the ground and you could see the sides caving in on it. For a building to collapse uniformly which the video show all the load bearing it would have to have failed 01:36 simultaneously. Now, fire doesn't act like that. I came across an analogy of the twin towers and if you could visualize cast iron stoves stacked. One on top of each other. The stoves up at the top. Yes, there's fire and they've been damaged but the stoves on the bottom, they haven't been damaged. Okay. So, the structure underneath all of that is intact. So, it's impossible for a building to collapse near free fall speed and increase. Without a 02:07 controlled demolition. You're running into the path of most resistance. I something else is going on. I don't believe that it was just the planes or the fires I think that and they examine the dust and they found what they call thermitic material which is like a explosive incendiary which was in the dust samples and that's documented. There were reports of the buildings were undergoing a extensive elevator renovation in the two or three years prior to all kinds of 02:40 workers they had access to the the core the cores of the building and on the day of the attack the the elevator company would not assist in the operations of the elevators and the elevator company was the elevator company it subsequently went out of business and a couple of years after that

Jul 28, 2025
Read more →
🔍
Partially True

Fact Check: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Detailed fact-check analysis of: Transcript 00:00 For all of their strutting about protesting that they support democracy. Not a one of them gave a damn about democracy when they pulled Biden off the ballot and dropped Kamala Harris in without a single Democrat primary voter voting for him. And you know what? Not a single Democrat is here today because not a single one of them gives a damn about the fact that they lied to the American people for four years. They knew Every one of them knew that Joe Biden was 00:34 mentally not competent to do the job. The White House Press Secretary. She knew when she stood in front of the American people and lied over and over and over again and they're not here because they can't defend themselves. It wasn't a surprise for four years the White House hid President Biden from Republican Senators. Would not let him meet with us. He served 40 years in this body. We all know him. And they deliberately lied and by the way Jake Tapper had a bombshell 01:08 book exposing the incredible scandal that Biden's mental decline was covered up by Jake Tapper. There's a Yiddish word and that truly is how dare we lie and cover up what we all knew. Now I have been asked literally a thousand times by Texans. Was running the country? And I'm going to give 01:40 you the most terrifying answer. I don't know. I genuinely don't know. And not a single Democrat here cares. The most telling proof of Biden's decline came with the signature of the president. The symbol of executive authority that was outsourced to a machine. Mister Wald you're a lawyer who served in the White House Council's Office. You understand the gravity of presidential action. Does the president's signature 02:10 carry legal and constitutional weight under article two? Yes. Is the act of signing an executive order or signing a law or granting a pardon a delegable duty of the president. Uh so in that opinion in 2005 from OLC they said essentially that an autopin could be used by a subordinate but the president's determination as to sign the document can never be delegated. Can that authority 02:41 be transferred to a staff or a machine without the president's explicit authorization? Never. And if you look at the statistics, the statistics are stunning. In 2021, President Biden issued 78 executive orders. None were signed with an auto pen. That first year the presidency, Biden I suppose was relatively lucid and 78 executive orders he signed by hand. The second year, however, we see the auto pen emerged. 03:15 The first auto pen executive order was issued on 15th 2022. After that day 100% of the executive orders issued in 2022 were signed by an autopen. In 2023 Biden issued twenty-four executive orders. 16 were auto penned. In 20twenty-four Biden issued 19. 14 were auto penned. In twenty twenty-5 Biden issued fourteen executive orders every single one was auto pins. 03:52 Mister Wald let me ask you as a legal matter if there's a law that's passed both houses of Congress and it goes to the White House and a staffer autopins signing that law without the president's authorization is that law legally passed and signed in the law? No. If an executive order is issued and a staffer autopins it without the president's authorization, is that executive order legally binding? No. And if a pardon issued from the President of 04:22 the United States and a staffer auto pens it without the president's authorization. Is that pardon legally binding? No. Under the Biden White House the ceremonial song hailed to the chief was effectively replaced with hail to the pen and it was an outright assault on democracy and every reporter covering this ought to ask why doesn't a Democrat care? We heard about the moral responsibilities of a staffer. 04:54 How about an elected senator who knows damn well that if we get into a war and Iran is preparing to fire a nuclear weapon at the United States that the commander in chief is busy playing with his jello and he's not competent to defend ourselves and every member of the cabinet, the chief of staff, the press secretary, and the members of Congress who lied about this on a daily basis with the press's complicity. They are all responsible for subverting democracy. Angry Ted Cruz is perhaps my favorite version of 05:27 Ted Cruz because when he's getting history on it, you might want to take a listen. He is definitely angry that there's some acting going on here in the line of hail to the chief change from hail to the pen that's not a smart line but it's still the truth. The truth is in this video right here ladies and gentlemen. The change in the way Joe Biden used the autopin is a steady upward moving graph from twenty twenty-one to the end of his presidency in early twenty 05:58 twenty-five. Okay? That is a noticeable issue. And if he does not directly authorize the autopin we've got We've got grounds to go through every single law Joe Biden has signed that way and perhaps ignore them all together. There's way more evidence behind the autopin theory and hopefully it ends up sticking. I I hope it does because I think this is in a way worse than the Bill Clinton perjury case. Cuz Bill 06:28 Clinton basically lied before Congress lied directly to the American people lied under oath. This is worse in a way. Because lying under oath means that you know where the truth is and you're just hoping to get away with it and there's a direct law. This however Signing with the auto pin is more opaque. It is an ultimate he said she said and you're dont rate the opinion oo just fact if there is

Jul 27, 2025
Read more →
Fact Check: 173 Nations Just Granted Expanded Powers to the WHO While public attention was elsewhere, representatives from 173 countries voted to significantly expand the authority of the World Health Organization (WHO) over national health policies, border decisions, and personal freedoms. Under these new agreements, when the WHO declares a "global health emergency," it will no longer need to seek approval from individual governments to enforce its directives. Your nation has already committed to following their lead. This could include: Border shutdowns Lockdowns Mass vaccination efforts Digital health ID systems All potentially initiated by unelected figures such as WHO Directo General Tedros Ghebreyesus or influential private actors like Bill Gates-without any democratic input from the citizens who will b
Partially True

Fact Check: 173 Nations Just Granted Expanded Powers to the WHO While public attention was elsewhere, representatives from 173 countries voted to significantly expand the authority of the World Health Organization (WHO) over national health policies, border decisions, and personal freedoms. Under these new agreements, when the WHO declares a "global health emergency," it will no longer need to seek approval from individual governments to enforce its directives. Your nation has already committed to following their lead. This could include: Border shutdowns Lockdowns Mass vaccination efforts Digital health ID systems All potentially initiated by unelected figures such as WHO Directo General Tedros Ghebreyesus or influential private actors like Bill Gates-without any democratic input from the citizens who will b

Detailed fact-check analysis of: 173 Nations Just Granted Expanded Powers to the WHO While public attention was elsewhere, representatives from 173 countries voted to significantly expand the authority of the World Health Organization (WHO) over national health policies, border decisions, and personal freedoms. Under these new agreements, when the WHO declares a "global health emergency," it will no longer need to seek approval from individual governments to enforce its directives. Your nation has already committed to following their lead. This could include: Border shutdowns Lockdowns Mass vaccination efforts Digital health ID systems All potentially initiated by unelected figures such as WHO Directo General Tedros Ghebreyesus or influential private actors like Bill Gates-without any democratic input from the citizens who will b

Jul 26, 2025
Read more →
Explore All Fact Checks