Europe Has Passed Resolutions on the Brotherhood for Two Years and Banned It Once, in 2021

Austria banned the Muslim Brotherhood through anti-terrorism legislation adopted by its parliament on 8 July 2021, a fact recorded in a European Parliament written question that year. Nothing since has matched it. The French Senate adopted anti-entryism legislation on 5 May 2026 by 208 votes to 124, following a non-binding National Assembly resolution on 22 January 2026 labelling the Brotherhood a terrorist organisation, which La France Insoumise opposed. The Dutch House of Representatives narrowly approved a motion for a ban on the Brotherhood and “affiliated organisations” on 17–18 March 2026, introduced by Party for Freedom members; Brussels Signal reported that the AIVD does not currently classify the Brotherhood as a structured organisation in the Netherlands, which leaves the motion without an object to prohibit.

Britain remains where the 2015 review left it. Sir John Jenkins concluded that aspects of Brotherhood ideology were “contrary to British values” and that the “Brotherhood is a possible indicator of extremism,” but did not recommend proscription. In December 2025 Keir Starmer told Jewish News a ban was under “very close review.” Jewish News noted on 24 July that the organisation “is not banned in the UK.” No Home Office statement, OFSI listing, ministerial comment or Charity Commission action has been located since the designation. The most-quoted British figure of the summer — 54 per cent support for a ban — comes from a JL Partners poll of 2,000 adults commissioned by the campaign group Muslims Against Antisemitism and Christianphobia, and rose only after respondents were shown findings from the government review.

Assessment: The nationality question is not pedantry. GB News describes al-Abyari as an Egyptian-Austrian dual national resident in London; the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an advocacy institute with a declared position, calls him Egyptian. If the Austrian element holds, Washington has sanctioned a citizen of the one European state that already bans the movement, and the enforcement gap sits inside the EU rather than across the Channel. Until the SDN entry is read, neither version should be repeated. The wider pattern is the desk’s recurring one: designation is fast and declaratory, prohibition is slow and evidentiary, and legislatures reach for the first when they cannot deliver the second. Steptoe’s compliance note still says “alleged” throughout.