Lords vote in favour of IRGC ban

During the debate on Thursday, Conservative Home Office minister Lord Davies of Gower said it was “clear that the Iranian regime is ramping up its aggressive activities.

“At home it wilfully oversaw the murder of over 40,000 protesters. Overseas it continued to extend its influence through its backing of terrorist cells. In the UK alone, in 2025, security services tracked more than 20 potentially lethal Iran-backed plots.”

He said this threat has been “exacerbated” following the recent war.

“Just last month, an Iranian man suspected of being a regime spy was arrested for attempting to break into a nuclear naval base in Scotland. We have seen the streets of our capital city filled with regime apologists on so-called Al-Quds day, leading to 12 arrests and countless lost police hours.

“Proscribing the IRGC would not only give the police more powers to counteract these actions, but send a signal that we do not bow to pressure from oppressive and authoritarian regimes,” he said.

The Tory minister added: “The evidence has been very clear… about the terror that the IRGC has caused in its own country. The threat to the UK from the IRGC is evident to all but the Government, it seems”.

Liberal Democrats justice spokesperson Lord Marks of Henley-on-Thames agreed, saying: “Not only has proscription of the IRGC been Liberal Democrat policy for a number of years but these Benches can see no sustainable argument why the Labour Government should refuse to proscribe the IRGC and associated organisations.

“We say that not only in the light of the Iranian regime’s appalling oppression and murder of thousands of protesters in January this year but in view of the character and actions of the IRGC generally and of its associated organisations. It is of no help to the Government to resist this amendment on the basis that the Government keep the issue of proscription under review anyway,” he went on.

Home Office minister Lord Hanson of Flint said the peers did not have the available intelligence on the Shia militia.

He told the peers, “With due respect to Lord Davies and Lord Marks, they have not had the intelligence in front of them from the intelligence services on these issues.

“We’re making judgments as a Government, and we’re not going to comment on a running commentary on where we proscribe and when we proscribe, because that is a very dangerous position to take.”

Peers and MPs from across both houses have called on the government to act now on the IRGC, widely understood to be the foremost sponsor of global terrorism.

Leaders from the Jewish community have urged the government to proscribe the group, which has repeatedly targeted Jewish and Iranian diasporas.

The Jewish Leadership Council and Board of Deputies met Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper this week and “reiterated the need for the government to move with urgency to proscribe the IRGC”.

Ministers have however backed a “hybrid” approach put forward by Jonathan Hall KC, the government’s independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, which would introduce new powers to target state-linked organisations such as the IRGC, although no timetable for implementing this policy has been set.

A Home Office spokesperson told the JC earlier this week: “We have introduced a comprehensive set of additional measures aimed at countering threats posed by the Iranian regime, including sanctioning the IRGC in its entirety, as well as more than 550 Iranian individuals and entities.

“Current proscription powers are designed for non-state terror organisations, not state organisations. We will legislate to introduce a proscription-like power to address the threat of hostile activity posed by state and state-linked bodies.”