Sunak’s proposals to classify anyone who “vilifies” Britain as an “extremist” betray an ignorance regarding how counter-extremism harms innocent people. But a closer look at the stats reveal deeper truths. Statistics for the past year up to March this year from the Home Office state that of the 196 arrests for terrorist-related activity, 55 (28%) were subsequently charged for terrorism-related offences. Moreover, the number of white people arrested for terrorist activity increased from last year, and are four times higher than Asian people. So, when Sunak asserts that “80% of live counter terror investigations” are of “Islamists”, what we should be asking is: why are 80% of the terrorism investigations centred on Muslims when arrests of presumably British white people are four times higher? Source: Surely this is the last desperate attempt to revive prevent? – The People Review of Prevent
The contender’s plan is idiotic and dangerous. Aren’t Tories supposed to champion free speech, says Miqdaad Versi of the Muslim Council of Britain. The implication of his proposals seems to be that any public sector worker covered by the Prevent duty would be required to refer anyone they believe is “vilifying” to the authorities. Would this include nationalists in Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, some of whom would readily vilify England? If not, why not? What about writers within our mainstream media, in publications such as the Spectator? Would Sunak’s policy include those who have non-mainstream political views on our nation’s colonial history? Source: Sunak wants to punish those who ‘vilify the UK’. That’s wrong – and he’s chosen the wrong target | Miqdaad Versi | The Guardian
Rishi Sunak’s proposals to strengthen the government’s anti-terrorism programme risk “straying into thought crimes” and are potentially damaging to national security, a former senior police chief has said. Such proposals would lead to more people being referred to Prevent by widening the definition of “extremism” to include those who “vilify” Britain, with Sunak pledging to focus on “rooting out those who are vocal in their hatred of our country”. But former counter-terrorism chief Sir Peter Fahy, who was also chief constable of Greater Manchester police, questioned the precise meaning of “vilification”. He said: “The widening of Prevent could damage its credibility and reputation. It makes it more about people’s thoughts and opinions.” Source: Former counter-terrorism police chief attacks Rishi Sunak’s Prevent plans | Rishi Sunak | The Guardian
Get the latest expert views from Prevent Watch’s senior caseworker and co-author of the PROP, including: There’s no evidence to prove Prevent’s “success” and we know it doesn’t work The UK criminal justice system is robust enough to handle political violence Some examples of why Prevent is a way to police belief Prevent is secular aggression to draw Muslims away from Islamic belief and behaviour Prevent’s new disguises and how to speak out We do not need Prevent; we only need sound knowledge Or you can view the full 5 Pillars podcast here. Source: 6 spectacular takeaways from prevent watch’s 5pillars podcast – The People Review of Prevent
The Home Office has confirmed the appointment of Robin Simcox as the substantive Commissioner for Countering Extremism (CCE). His tenure will last for a three-year period. Simcox’s appointment has been agreed by the Home Secretary Priti Patel. Previously, Simcox has dismissed the use of the term “Islamophobia”. He also worked for a US far-right think-tank The Counter Extremism Group. Simcox said Extinction Rebellion, Unite Against Fascism and the far left “need monitoring”. Source: Robin Simcox appointed as Commissioner for Countering Extremism – GOV.UK
An agreement between the United States and United Kingdom to improve cross-border law enforcement data sharing will go into effect later this year, the two nations announced in a joint statement. They will now be able to directly request data like messages and pictures, for example, from telecommunications providers in the other’s jurisdiction. The non-profit digital rights group Electronic Frontier Foundation has previously criticized the foundational idea of data sharing with cross-border law enforcement as “a dangerous expansion of police snooping”. Source: What is the UK-US Data Access Agreement? | Popular Science
We need your support, join us and see how you can support people impacted by Prevent. With our case load increasing and the fear spreading we need to work harder to support more people. We need all the finance, time and resource you can offer.
We are supported by the community to serve the community. We are not government funded and rely on the community to support our work.