The full submission in Word format is available here.
This submission responds to the UK Government’s response to the Committee’s 2024 recommendations regarding the Prevent duty.
Briefly, the Committee called on the UK to:
- suspend the Prevent duty
- introduce robust safeguards to ensure that these measures do not result, in purpose or effect, in profiling or discrimination
- introduce independent monitoring mechanisms and access to remedies for those harmed by Prevent.
Our central concern is that the UK Government has not meaningfully engaged with the substance of these findings or recommendations.
Failure to Acknowledge Discrimination
The UK Government’s response does not engage with the premise that Prevent is discriminatory and targets Muslims disproportionately.
The 2023 Independent Review of Prevent rejected the characterisation of Prevent as discriminatory and framed these concerns as part of an ‘Islamist’ campaign.
This approach continued in the 2024 Lessons for Prevent report by Lord David Anderson, KC, which presents concerns about discrimination as a ‘narrative’ advanced by ‘some individuals and groups’ that were subsequently ‘picked up by the UN’.
Nonetheless, the UK government’s own Equality Impact Assessment explicitly acknowledges that Muslims are overrepresented within Prevent and that it may disproportionately affect ethnic minorities – yet the government justifies this by referring to a perceived threat from ‘Islamist terrorism’, even though most referrals to Channel (42% in 2021-22) are for far-right concerns.
Prevent Watch recommends that the Committee require the State party to formally acknowledge the discriminatory and disproportionate impact of Prevent, as identified by the Committee, and to demonstrate how this is being assessed and addressed in practice.
Expansion of Prevent and the Entrenchment of Discrimination
Instead of suspending Prevent, the UK government has expanded it.
Firstly, in the aftermath of the Southport attack, the UK government used the case to justify calls for stronger “Islamist” referrals, despite the perpetrator having no “Islamist” ideology.
Secondly, the government’s Social Cohesion Action Plan, Protecting What Matters strengthens Prevent in education, local government, and civil society by leveraging notions of integration and shared values based on the Conservative Party’s 2023 definition of ‘extremism’.
Prevent Watch submits that the Committee should be alert not only to the continued operation of Prevent, but to its transformation under the guise of social cohesion as well as security. The Committee should therefore call on the State party to halt further expansion and to demonstrate how current policies comply with its obligation to eliminate discriminatory impact.
Ineffective Remedial Measures
The primary mechanism cited by the UK as a safeguard against harm is the Standards and Compliance Unit, known as StaCU, which sits within and is funded by the Home Office.
However, in the government’s own words StaCU “works to ensure that Prevent is being delivered properly” – thus, it is not a safeguard for the public and those harmed by it, but a compliance mechanism that protects the policy itself.
Furthermore, the newly appointed Independent Commissioner of Prevent previously served as Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Counter Terrorism Policing and as Senior National Coordinator for Prevent, raising serious concerns about independence. He also has no statutory powers to compel disclosure, order remedies, or require reparations.
Prevent Watch recommends that the Committee call on the State party to establish genuinely independent oversight of Prevent, with statutory powers, structural independence, and the remit necessary to investigate discriminatory impact, order reparations, and provide meaningful accountability to the communities most harmed.
Our full submission is available in Word format here.
Related…
United Nations urges government to suspend Prevent strategy in the UK
