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.
This blog deals with the harmful aspects of Prevent to which Shawcross admits when he describes it as “a state-run scheme to counter specific ideas, attitudes,
New Prevent guidelines for responsible authorities will be severely tested by the fallout from the military actions in Israel-Palestine.
Home Secretary Suella Braverman has told the British parliament that a controversial commentator accused of a “record of hate” against Muslims holds “mainstream, insightful and perfectly
William Shawcross, the head of a criticised review into the Prevent has said he is “happy and very grateful” to receive a knighthood.
Shawcross sees a need for more ‘rigorous’ Prevent training, while it already violates various civil liberties including the freedom of religion, association and legal dissent.
The Shawcross Review does not address the harms of Prevent scrutiny of children, and specifically Muslim children. Rather, its recommendations will accentuate them.
The Shawcross recommendations to Prevent ignore the Manchester Arena Enquiry, and rather urge a greater securitisation of society that is harmful in the long term.
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 closer look at the function of Prevent in education reveals serious errors by William Shawcross, both in his recommendations and in his understanding of Prevent
Witnesses to the House of Commons home affairs select committee tripped over themselves last week in a bid to answer who gets to define a person
