What’s happened: The British government has announced that it will designate the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) under new powers to crack down on foreign state-backed activity.
- This development was announced by the Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, in the House of Commons on Monday. Ms Mahmood confirmed that the draft legislation would be laid down this week and voted on by Wednesday or Thursday, formally coming into law by Friday.
- The group Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamia (HAYI, also known as Islamic Movement of Companions of the Right, IMRC), the virtual proxy which claimed responsibility for attacks on the Jewish community this past spring, has also been designated, as has the main intelligence directorate of the general staff of the armed forces of the Russian Federation Volunteer Corps, or GRU VC.
- This criminalises expressing support, assisting, or gaining material benefit from these groups with a maximum punishment of 14 years imprisonment.
- In a written statement, Dame Angela Eagle, Minister of State for Security said that the IRGC “is a central component of the Iranian state’s security apparatus, answerable directly to Iran’s Supreme Leader. Its role extends far beyond that of a conventional military force. It encompasses intelligence activity, the use of proxy actors, and the projection of influence designed to advance Iranian state objectives.”
- She also specifically cited an attempted IRGC-directed assassination plot against Iran International controlled by the Quds Force’s Unit 840, and attempts by IRGC-linked cyber proxy actors targeting the UK as examples of the threat levels emanating from Tehran.
- The Conservatives have cautiously welcomed this development, with the Shadow Foreign Secretary, Dame Priti Patel stating that the decision was “long overdue”, and that “the Government must urgently explain how this designation will be enforced, and on what timetable.”
- Alongside IRGC and HAYI designation, the government also announced £250 million over the next 3 years to boost security of the Jewish communities.
- The funding will be split across policing priorities to tackle antisemitism including:
- A further £86 million to the Metropolitan Police which will fund around 300 additional officers to increase police presence in Jewish communities.
- Over £22 million to Greater Manchester Police to sustain the increase in policing presence following the tragic attack in Heaton Park last year,
- Around £43 million to be distributed across 7 other force areas with significant Jewish communities: Hertfordshire, Essex, Northumbria, Sussex, Thames Valley, West Midlands and West Yorkshire,
- £41 million for national policing coordination and increased antisemitism capabilities. This will fund antisemitism training for all officers in England and Wales, strengthen investigations and ensure surge resources are available to all forces.
- £59 million to Counter-Terrorism Police to bolster protective security and counter state threats.
Context: This follows the Home Secretary being granted new powers under the National Security (State Threats) Act 2026 to use proscription-like powers to designate groups working at the behest of, or in the interests of, foreign states to carry out acts which threaten the UK’s security and the safety of communities across the country.
- Jewish communal groups have for years called for IRGC proscription. Despite Conservative pledges that proscription would be forthcoming in 2023, successive Prime Ministers and Home Secretaries failed to do so.
- Proscription was expected to take place by 2024, but the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) instead issued a raft of sanctions against the IRGC Quds Force’s Unit 840, Quds Force officers, and other individuals implicated in the killing of dissidents in Turkey.
- It is also understood that while the Home Office was amenable to and supported proscription, the FCDO blocked the proposals out of concern that Iran might retaliate by severing diplomatic relations between London and Tehran.
- The National Security Act which criminalised assisting foreign intelligence services received Royal Assent in 2023 and was subsequently used to charge, prosecute, and convict agents working on behalf of Iran and Russia. However, belonging to or supporting the IRGC did not automatically become a criminal offence.
- Prosecutions relating to Iran have seldom referenced which specific agency or service was sponsoring the alleged plot, instead using “Iranian intelligence services” as a more generic catch-all phrase. Apart from the National Security Act, prosecutions also used Terrorism Act 2000 and Official Secrets Act 1911.
- In May 2025, Jonathan Hall KC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, argued that the Terrorism Act 2000 was designed to disrupt the influence non-state actors, and should not be used to proscribe state actors. Instead, he suggested that new proscription-like legislation should be drafted.
- While Labour had committed to “take the approach used for dealing with non-state terrorism and adapt it to deal with state-based domestic security threats” in its 2024 general election manifesto, it only committed to take firm action in the aftermath of spring 2026’s HAYI-claimed attacks against the Jewish community.
- Additional resources towards Jewish comunnities’ safety comes following a series of attacks and the raising of the UK’s national terror threat level from substantial to severe.
Looking ahead: Now the IRGC has been designated, the relevant legislation must be properly enforced, both by Home Office police forces and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
- In the aftermath of Hamas’s 7th October attacks, the CPS have shown a distinct reluctance to enforce Section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000 which criminalises supporting, inviting support for, and expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a proscribed organisation.
- In one case, the CPS initially twice refused to charge an individual who was alleged to have chanted “I love the 7th of October” and “I like an organisation that starts with H” during a pro-Palestinian protest. Charges were only approved on the police’s third approach to the CPS.
- Given past precedent and systemic resourcing challenges, it is a realistic possibility that inviting support for, or expressing an opinion or belief that is supportive of a designated body when done so for a prohibited purpose may not be fully enforced.


