The introduction of the Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Act 2025[1], commonly known as Martyn’s Law, marks a significant shift in how UK organisations must prepare for and respond to terrorism-related risks. For business continuity professionals, this legislation isn’t just a new compliance requirement; it’s a strategic opportunity to strengthen resilience and embed counter-terrorism measures into existing continuity frameworks.
Although this legislation only applies in the UK, and not to all organisations within the UK, the ideas behind it matter everywhere. Risk assessment, emergency planning, and incident response aren’t just UK concerns, they’re global best practices. For resilience and security professionals outside the UK, understanding Martyn’s Law offers an insight into how regulation and adoption of its guiding principles can drive stronger security and resilience planning standards.
These principles are relevant to any organisation that values resilience, public and employee safety.
Martyn’s Law applies to publicly accessible UK venues and introduces a tiered approach to compliance:
The aim is clear: organisations must ensure they are equipped to respond effectively to terrorist threats, minimising harm and disruption.
Business continuity planning (BCP) is about ensuring that critical operations can continue or recover quickly after any disruption. Martyn’s Law fits naturally into this framework, expanding the scope of risk management to include terrorism as a specific threat.
Here’s how BCP professionals can align Martyn’s Law with existing practices:
Even if Martyn’s Law doesn’t apply to your organisation, particularly if you don’t operate publicly accessible venues in the UK, its principles still offer value. Adopting its practices can improve safety, security, build resilience, and demonstrate a proactive approach to risk management. For business continuity professionals, this is an opportunity to lead by example and show a strong commitment to duty of care.
Bringing Martyn’s Law into business continuity planning delivers real strategic benefits by driving improved resilience. Embedding terrorism preparedness into existing frameworks means an organization becomes better equipped to handle a broader range of threats; not just the ones we expect.
There’s another advantage; stakeholder confidence. Taking a proactive stance on safety and risk management sends a clear message that the organisation takes its responsibilities seriously. People notice that.
Finally, integration creates operational efficiency. Instead of running separate processes, terrorism-related security measures sit within the business continuity structure, reducing duplication and saving time.
Martyn’s Law is more than a legal requirement; it’s a framework for creating safer, more resilient organisations. For business continuity professionals, it provides a clear path to address terrorism risks within broader continuity planning. Whether mandated or not, integrating its principles is a smart move that protects people, supports operations, and builds trust in an increasingly uncertain world.
Martyn’s Law and the Good Practice Guidelines share some clear common ground. Both start with risk assessment, requiring organizations to identify and evaluate threats in a structured way.
They also emphasise preparedness and response. Each framework insists on having documented plans and trained people ready to act. Plans shouldn’t sit on a shelf; they need to be practical and understood.
Validation is another point of alignment. Testing and exercising plans are essential in both approaches. It’s how you find gaps and make sure everything works when it matters most.
Finally, there’s a commitment to continuous improvement. The Good Practice Guidelines encourage regular reviews and updates, while Martyn’s Law makes readiness an ongoing responsibility. Neither sees resilience as a one-off task, it’s a process that evolves over time.