We look at the banning and blacklisting of terrorist groups.

How organisations are framed as terrorist, and why they are so labelled, makes a difference. And it's not always about public safety.

This collaborative research (with Professor Lee Jarvis: University of East Anglia, UK) pioneers one of the first Political Science scholarly analyses of proscription powers. Proscription is an ancient power that remains central to modern states’ efforts to simultaneously construct and eradicate those designated as terrorist or enemies. This project highlights how, globally, this power is applied with considerable variation, resulting in the criminalisation of minority communities, the entrenching of political violence, the prolonging of conflicts, and the denial of participation in democratic processes.

Tracing the processes and rhetoric of banning terrorist organisations reveals much about the power of politicians to impose a particular roster of values in both liberal and illiberal countries. It is one that delimits the scope of legitimate and illegitimate political dissent in a democracy, and it is one that frequently employs the label of terrorism to achieve political, rather than public safety, goals. We develop innovative empirical and theoretical knowledge on proscription and political exclusion and disseminate this to the Australian and UK governments; non-government organisations; and members of the Australian and UK parliaments. This work has been published in British PoliticsReview of International StudiesSecurity Dialogue; Political Studies and Terrorism & Political Studies.

Our published research