# Approaches to Defining Terrorism and Violent Extremism

## Terrorism

In the absence of an internationally agreed definition of terrorism and considering the low level of agreement on who is considered a terrorist actor, identification and classification of TVEC can be based on an ideology agnostic approach focusing on terrorism as a method.  

Such an approach can build on legal definitions of crimes of terrorism, which focus on terrorism as a criminal act and commonly integrate the following elements[^1]:
- Perpetration of a criminal act
- Intent to threaten the population or to coerce a government or international governmental organisation.

[^1]: The below elements are common to the legal definitions of terrorism in France (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/id/LEGISCTA000006149845); Belgium (https://www.ejustice.just.fgov.be/cgi_loi/article.pl?language=fr&lg_txt=f&type=&sort=&numac_search=1867060850&cn_search=&caller=article&&view_numac=1867060850nx1867060850f#Art.137), and the European Union (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3A4322328). 

Certain jurisdictions include a third element[^2]:
- Aiming to advance a cause that is ideological, political, religious – with certain jurisdictions also including a cause that is racial.

[^2]: This element is common to the legal definitions of terrorism in the United Kingdom (https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/11/section/1), Canada (https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-46.pdf), and Australia (https://www.ag.gov.au/national-security/australias-counter-terrorism-laws). 

The UN customary definition also integrates a transnational element, which can also be found in certain national definitions of terrorism including as a key factor for terrorist designation[^3]. However, this is jurisdiction dependent and not all legal approaches to defining terrorism or designating terrorist actors will include this element.  

[^3]: See the UNODC's resources on defining terrorism: https://www.unodc.org/e4j/fr/terrorism/module-4/key-issues/defining-terrorism.html

The Global Internet Forum to Counter Terrorism’s (GIFCT) map of Global Definitions of Terrorism offers an overview of key elements of legal definitions of terrorism globally, covering 64 definitions[^4].

[^4]: See the GIFCT's map of Global Definitions of Terrorism: https://def-frameworks.gifct.org/global-definitions-of-terrorism/

In addition to legal definitions of terrorist activities, certain countries and international organisations maintain terrorist designation lists[^5]. Such designation lists can serve as a basis to assess who is considered a terrorist actor in a certain jurisdiction. Though it should be noted that designation lists are a financial sanctions and intelligence sharing tool and were not designed for countering terrorist and violent extremist use of the internet. A number of criticisms (including from civil society organisations, counter-terrorism experts, and legal experts) have also been raised against terrorist designation lists over the years. Alternatively, certain jurisdictions can proscribe terrorist and violent extremist organisations on grounds related to terrorism[^6], violent extremism, threats to national security, or threats to the constitutional order.  Proscriptions on the ground of terrorism or violent extremism can also serve as an indicator of who is considered a terrorist or violent extremist actor in a jurisdiction. Depending on the jurisdiction, these proscriptions are designed as an administrative process prohibiting membership and support to proscribed organisations, as in France. In other jurisdictions it can also expand to include a ban on associated imagery, as in Germany[^7].

[^5]: Example of jurisdictions maintaining designation lists at the national level include the US, UK, Australia, Canada. At the international level, the UN and EU also maintain national designation lists which their members abide with. 

[^6]: This is the case in France for instance through the Interior Security Code (https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/codes/section_lc/LEGITEXT000025503132/LEGISCTA000025505187/).

[^7]: Germany Domestic Intelligence Services (2022), Right-wing extremism: symbols, signs and banned organisations (https://www.verfassungsschutz.de/SharedDocs/publikationen/EN/right-wing-extremism/2022-07-right-wing-extremism-symbols-and-organisations.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=12https://www.verfassungsschutz.de/SharedDocs/publikationen/EN/right-wing-extremism/2022-07-right-wing-extremism-symbols-and-organisations.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=12)

Regarding the definition of terrorist content, few jurisdictions have one. The EU does provide such a definition in the Regulation on Addressing the Dissemination of Terrorist Content Online (2021/784, commonly referred to as EU-TCO). The EU-TCO definition of terrorist content applies to material that, in relation to the EU legal framework[^8]:
- Incited the commission of a terrorist offence,
- Solicit a person or a group of persons to commit or contribute to the commission of a terrorist offence
- Solicit a person or a group of persons to participate in the activities of a terrorist group
- Provide instruction on the making or uses of weapons or other specific methods or techniques for the purpose of committing or contributing to the commission of a terrorist offence
- Constitutes a threat to commit a terrorist offence  

The UK Online Safety Act also defines “terrorism content”, which is considered a “priority illegal content”, in reference to existing terrorism offences in UK laws[^9]. New Zealand also has a framework for classifying content as TVEC though its Classification Office[^10].

[^8]: See the EU TCO definition: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32021R0784
[^9]: See Vaughan Katy (2025), The UK’s Online Safety Act and “Terrorist Content”, in Vox-Pol (https://voxpol.eu/the-uks-online-safety-act-and-terrorist-content/)
[^10]: See the New Zealand Classification Office resources at: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Countering-Violent-Extremism-Legislation-and-legal-process

## Violent Extremism

Similar to terrorism, there is no internationally agreed definition of violent extremism, and most jurisdictions do not provide a legal definition of violent extremism or related crimes.  

Different scholars have attempted to provide a definition of violent extremism [^11]. Common to different conceptualisations of violent extremism is the notion of political violence, which can include terrorism. Common to the definition proposed are the following elements:  
- Promoting ideological, political, or religious aims
- Advocating for or uses violence to realise those aims
- Tolerating, supporting, actively calling for, or directly uses violence against civilians or critical civilian infrastructure.

[^11]: Including: Bak, Tarp, and Liang, 2019; Berger, 2019; Lamphere-Englund & Thompson, 2024. 

These elements are reflected in the definition used by UNESCO: “the beliefs and actions of people who support or use violence to achieve ideological, religious or political goals,” including “terrorism and other forms of politically motivated and sectarian violence”[^12].

[^12]: UNESCO (2017), Preventing violent extremism through education: A guide for policymakers: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247764 

Certain tech companies’ definitions of dangerous organisations, including violent extremist ones, further add the element of “non-state actors” to their approach to violent extremism.