The People’s Review of Prevent is an alternative review to the Government Shawcross Review.
This review provides a voice to the people most impacted by the Prevent Duty.
Prevent is described as ‘safeguarding’ children from harms. However, under Prevent, safeguarding is focused on protecting the wider public from children believed to be ‘risky’, rather than protecting children from harms.
Throughout our report we present case studies that show how real these harms can be and the distress they cause to children and their families and carers.
CCE chief Robin Simcox should not be regarded as a neutral arbiter of extremism, but rather as a partisan figure within the landscape over which he
Birmingham artist Faisal Hussain’s We Must Not Be Extreme is part of an existing series of sculptural works that challenge Prevent, entitled Suspect Objects Suspect Subjects.
Sikh lawyers released a report stating that the Bloom Review is fundamentally flawed both in its methodology and in its outcome with respect to the Sikh
Evidence demonstrates that conflating charity and extremism through counter-terror policies has harmed charitable and humanitarian work with the direst consequences borne by aid recipients.
A new report, Islamophobia in the Digital Age by the Islamic Council of Victoria in Canada, has concluded that Twitter anti-Muslim hate was not being removed, and that most of it came from India. The report revealed that over a two-year period, between 28 August 2019 and 27 August 2021, India was the main culprit of spreading Islamophobia on social media. India recorded the by-far highest figure of Islamophobic tweets, with 871,379, followed by the US with 289,248, and the UK, with 196,376. The report states that in India, the rampant Islamophobia is a result of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party’s (BJP) normalisation of hatred against Muslims. The report also concluded that Twitter ‘drastically failing’ at removing anti-Muslim content, but that politicians and leading figures can have a positive impact. Source: Majority of anti-Muslim Twitter posts come from US, UK and India | Middle East Eye
Attacks like the Plymouth shooting involving Jake Davidson last year, prove that the greatest emerging threat is not Islamist, but in a rapidly expanding set of so-called mixed, unclear and unstable (MUU) extremism cases. Davidson, 22, shot dead five people in Plymouth last year, before turning the gun on himself. A large element of this rapid growth has seen Prevent referrals inheriting much of the case load of young people with “complex needs” from underfunded local services. Data from 2021 suggests up to 70 per cent of people referred to Prevent may have mental health issues. Growing numbers of MUU referrals suggest practitioners are struggling to classify these cases within frameworks built to handle clear-cut ideological categories. Events like those in Plymouth speak to a more disparate set of extremism-related threats than the current government approach can capture. The New Statesman argues that they require a new paradigm of response.
The far-right and Ukraine compared to Palestine solidarity in UK schools is the subject of this CAGE survey and brief released in July 2022, taken from
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
The Emergence of ‘Extremism’: Exposing the Violent Discourse and Language of ‘Radicalisation’ is informed by Rob Faure Walker’s experience with Prevent while teaching in a Muslim
