INTIMIDATORY animal rights extremists could be prosecuted under the same laws as those used to to bring al-Qaeda suspects to trial.

On the eve of ministers unveiling their strategy to combat the activists, the Director of Public Prosecutions reminded prosecutors that they can use the Terrorism Act 2000. The terrorism measures, he said, can properly be applied to “the more extreme activities of animal rights activists”.

David Blunkett will today announce measures aimed at curbing animal rights activists. The Home Secretary will report that the Government will make it a specific criminal offence to protest outside someone’s home in an intimidating way. It will also be an arrestable offence to return to a person’s house after being found guilty of aggressive behaviour.

Anti-harassment laws are to be extended so that groups of employees facing repeated alarm and distress can apply for restraining orders. New protections against harassment are to be introduced for companies so that they do not spend time and cash on seeking court injunctions.

Ministers are thought to be ready to use armed forces to protect biomedical research facilities during construction and afterwards. Sources in the pharmaceutical industry expressed concern last night that the measures were ineffectual.

Use of the Terrorism Act would send out a signal that animal rights extremists cannot evade the law or the heaviest penalties. Any prosecutions brought under the Act would be seen as a test case. The Crown Prosecution Service is ready to fight any challenge through the courts.

In his guidance to prosecutors the DPP, Ken Macdonald, QC, acknowledges that “it might be argued that Parliament never intended the Act to be applied to animal rights activism.” But, he says: “I do not accept that this is so.” If all the statutory criteria for a prosecution are met, then such an argument “ought not to succeed.”

Terrorism within the meaning of the Act is the “use or threat of action that involves serious violence against a person, serious damage to property, endangers the life of another or creates a serious risk to the health or safety of the public or a section of the public.” The action used or threatened must be designed to influence the Government or intimidate the public or a section of the public, it says.

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Should Knox’s trial even have reached the courtroom?
• All that glitters is not sold in Wright’s world
• Believe it or not, Big Brother is your friend