On Wednesday, the government published its long-anticipated “independent review” into the failed counterterrorism scheme known as Prevent. Led by the open Islamophobe, William Shawcross, the 192-page report is mostly a hodgepodge of a misuse of terms such as “radicalisation”, “safeguarding”, and “vulnerability”. Incredibly, the entire report is based on a grand total of six case studies. [1]
For the British Muslim community and anyone else who believes in the prevention of tyrannical government, this report, formally titled the Independent Review of Prevent, is anything but independent. It is not even worthy of being viewed as a review.
In a press release, the rights group Amnesty International warned that the report is,
“…riddled with biased thinking, errors, and plain anti-Muslim prejudice – frankly, the review has no legitimacy.” [2]
A dangerous waste of time and taxpayer funds
One of the key issues with the report as a whole is that Shawcross makes an incredibly concerted effort to redirect government and state-aligned organs in the direction of tackling “Islamist ideology”. [1]
This comes at a time when figures show that extreme right-wing terrorism or ERWT is the fastest rising form of terrorism in the UK. [3] [4]
In so doing, many critics have suggested that Shawcross is making Britain a far less safe place, as the real terror threats are now going to be ignored. [3]
“Wholeheartedly” accepting every recommendation?
The Home Secretary, Suella Braverman, has already jumped to the conclusion that every single recommendation made by Shawcross will be implemented.
If only the government were as willing to accept recommendations on issues of race, health care, education, and other sectors – think Race Review or Islamophobia Review. [5] [6]
Following the report’s publication on 8 February, Braverman stated,
“I am grateful to William Shawcross and welcome his independent review. Prevent will now ensure it focuses on the key threat of Islamist terrorism. As part of this more proportionate approach, we will also remain vigilant on emerging threats, including on the extreme right.
“This independent review has identified areas where real reform is required. This includes a need for Prevent to better understand Islamist ideology, which underpins the predominant terrorist threat facing the UK.
“I wholeheartedly accept all 34 recommendations and am committed to quickly delivering wholesale change to ensure we are taking every possible step to protect our country from the threat posed by terrorism.” [7]
People’s Review of Prevent: the only credible review
It has been four years and four Prime Ministers since the government’s announcement of the so-called independent review into Prevent in January 2019.
In the meantime, not only has there been a credible response from British civil society, it has also made a mockery of the Shawcross attempt.
While the People’s Review of Prevent (PROP) – a project spearheaded by Prevent Watch – was announced in June 2021, it delivered on its objectives in breakneck speed. [8]
By February of 2022, just eight months in the making, 600 cases had been analysed. And devastating findings confirmed that Prevent:
- Undermines free expression;
- Is discriminatory towards Muslims;
- Is reliant on unfair profiling of Muslim communities;
- Is overwhelmingly fixated on children and young people;
- Is an abuse of individual privacy rights and data protection;
- Is an abuse of basic human rights and protected characteristics;
- Targets behaviours and actions that are in and of themselves not illegal;
- Is being shared with despotic regimes to aid in the oppression of Muslims;
- Undermines appropriate safeguarding work carried out by social workers, school staff, and other professionals. [9]
Shawcross report a “D minus”
The co-chair of the People’s Review of Prevent, John Holmwood – emeritus Professor of Sociology in the School of Sociology and Social Policy at the University of Nottingham – was brutal in his remarks following the Shawcross report’s release.
Professor Holmwood stated,
“The Shawcross Review is ideologically-driven, factually erroneous, and methodologically poor. It is based on hearsay evidence and doesn’t even evaluate internal reports produced by government departments.
“It’s difficult to understand what William Shawcross has been up to in the two years he has been working on this review. All it does is recalibrate Prevent without addressing any legitimate concerns.” [10]
He added further,
“His effort to smear the lawful opinions of British Muslims and silence Prevent critics is disgraceful; it shows Shawcross’ interest in free speech is partial and partisan. If he were my student, he’d get a D minus for the report.
“Bizarrely, despite stressing the importance of Prevent to Britain’s security, Shawcross refrains from recommending putting it on a statutory footing with an annual independent review, which suggests he has little confidence in Prevent surviving such a process.” [10]
I see your 6 cases and raise 600
Likewise, Dr. Layla Aitlhadj, Director of Prevent Watch and fellow co-chair of PROP, painted a damning picture of the Shawcross report.
Dr. Aitlhadj stated,
“Light on research, poor on analysis, and heavy on anti-Muslim bias, the Shawcross Review fails in every regard. For the People’s Review of Prevent, we analysed 600 cases of people referred to the programme. Shawcross based his entire report on just 6 Channel cases!
“The simple fact is Prevent does not stop terrorism and this review has, unsurprisingly, not provided any evidence to suggest otherwise.
“Meanwhile, our report provided ample evidence of the harms that Prevent has caused: from innocent children who now need counselling after their traumatic interrogations by counter-terrorism officers, to further education opportunities being withdrawn from students due to the information-sharing that occurs in Prevent cases.” [10]
Dr. Aitlhadj further added,
“The UK already has robust laws to deal with terrorism and would-be terrorists. The Government needs to stop wasting resources on the failed Prevent policy and instead invest it back into services that are vital for a healthy society: in social care, mental health care, and education.” [10]
What happens now?
We must continue to support Muslim and non-Muslim organisations that continue to oppose and call for the scrapping of Prevent.
It is a clear Islamophobic tool in the government’s arsenal of discriminatory policies and British Muslims must remain united in applying pressure on the government to ditch this toxic and failed scheme.
The People’s Review of Prevent is currently being updated, following the release of the Shawcross report. Let’s stay on the lookout for a revised copy that is set to land in Spring. [10]
Also read
- UN expert: Prevent strategy violates human rights
- Government seeking counterterror orders for children
- Government accused of illegal meddling in investigation
- Prevent: Students essays in university reported to police
- Four-year-old Muslim boy reported to Prevent over video game
- Prevent: UK Police criminalising Muslim mental health problems
- Abolish Prevent: CAGE launches powerful community resource on toxic policy
- Newly released list of Prevent Priority Areas proves the policy is oppressive at the core
- How can Muslims work for Prevent after this damning report from the People’s Review of Prevent?
- Prevent experts call on Charity Commission to investigate Policy Exchange after condemned report
Source: Islam21c
Notes
[5] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/mar/16/ministers-government-strategy-sewell-race-report
[8] https://peoplesreviewofprevent.org/about/
9 Comments
Just on a side note, the whole ‘Trojan Horse’ (TH) scandal, was nothing short of a put-up job to smear, torment and intimidate Muslim educators, families and children. With hindsight, it is clear that there was a method to this madness! With the steamrollering of the ‘alphabet people’ agenda, especially in education by people of questionable morality, Muslims in particular needed to be ‘softened up’ beforehand.
Had this not been such a serious issue, it would have been laughable to say the very least that a ‘mysterious and anonymous’ letter, propagated by a discredited Islamophobic ‘journalist’ (sic), became the foundation stone for a concerted campaign of disinformation, discrimination and terror against Muslims in Birmingham. Nb. it seems that there were plans to expand the scope of the TH investigation with claims that Birmingham was merely the tip of the iceberg.
Once upon a time, a certain book, which was claimed to have been written by the Czarist Russian secret police, to tarnish a ‘certain community’, accusing them (Jews) of conspiring to achieve world domination. If I’m not mistaken, the said book is banned in many countries. Yet an ‘anonymous letter’ became the raison d’etre for the state to effectively terrorize Muslims; both adults and children alike.
I agree!
JazakAllah Khayran for the offer. However, I don’t think it would work out.
While writing this piece, I was holding back quite a bit! I wouldn’t want you to get ‘shawcrossed’ now, would I?
Shawcross is merely the tip of the iceberg. He is the result of the treasonous poison which infests the Muslim community; go figure! For the authorities to have even contemplated this man’s candidature for the post of ‘independent’ (sic) reviewer for PREVENT, shows the utter contempt with which the Muslims in the UK are held by the authorities. Nb. I have great difficulty in describing Muslims in the UK, as a ‘community’!
We witnessed the ‘crucifixion’ of JC; Jeremy Corbin, the then leader of the opposition, over alleged anti-Semitism. Before him, another senior politician; Ken Livingstone was similarly accused and hounded out, due to their shared condemnation of the policies of a ‘particular country’.
Yet in this clear-cut case of state-sponsored persecution of a collective; i.e Muslims in the UK, the government is not only singling out this group of people because of their beliefs, but is using the most overt and NAZI-like approach in doing so. Playing to the stereotypes of Godwin’s law, I cannot find a better example than that of NAZI Germany, of a government hounding and discriminating; through legislation, a component of a country’s population. Wilhelm Stukart was a senior Nazi Party lawyer, as well as a State Secretary in the Reich Interior Ministry during the Nazi era. He was a co-author of the notorious discriminatory Nuremberg Laws and was a participant in the January 1942 Wannsee Conference. During Wannsee, the genocidal ‘final solution to the Jewish Question’, was planned. Stukart made it clear at the aforementioned conference, that EVERYTHING that was done to the Jews had to be predicated upon the law, to gain legitimacy to the masses, as well as to the world at large! Dare I state that Adolf Hitler was DEMOCRATICALLY elected in 1933.
Our community is ridden with traitors of the lowliest magnitude. I had previously mentioned the name of the Labour member for Perry Barr! Once upon a time, ‘Northern (mostly) Pakistani/Mirpuri- origin Muslims were put forth as community spokesmen/representatives. Being bereft of any self-respect, Qadianis have now taken their designated mantle in speaking on behalf of ‘British Moslems’ (sic).
The UK isn’t a unique case. Sweden seems to be challenging France’s position, as one of the vilest and most discriminatory Islamophobic countries.
The question is, if after any pyrrhic victory over PREVENT. What’s next?
You are absolutely right on many of the points mentioned.
In the UK and other European countries, there is a clear bias towards some faith groups/ ethnicities, whilst Muslims are painted with not just the same brush, but one that is dirty/ contaminated!
On the points of Corbyn and Livingstone, this is a truly shameful indictment of the state of this country, and the power of the pro-‘Israel’ lobby.
I think, like you said, there may be worse to come and behind the scenes or under the surface. However, I hope that Muslims in the UK and other countries maintain an air of caution when it comes to government engagement, and work collaboratively, in order that policies like Prevent and others like with Denmark’s social housing categories, and so on, are fought back against.
Perhaps you should look into the ‘Benes decrees’. They’ve never been revoked. With Brexit and the ultra-parochial stance of the UK, these decrees may well in future become a legal precedent. When we look at the sanguinary history and present of Europe, we find a people having a penchant for slaughtering not only the ‘other’ in periodical genocidal orgies….but their own!
This is really interesting! Jazaak Allaahu khayran for all of your insights and I will certainly check out these laws.
You have my email address, please feel free to contact me.
In cahoots with the BBC, Shawcross presented a 3 part hate filled, propaganda laden piece of scaremongering; ‘Planet Islam’, in 1997.
Shawcross was lurking behind the scenes when in 2002, the charities commission decided to prevent Shaykh Abu Hamza Al Masri from leading Salaat at Finsbury Park Mosque.
From 1995 until 2005, Shawcross was a board member of the International Crisis Group, a think tank with deep NATO sympathies.
This noted Islamophobe, who in 2012, during his tenure as director of the right wing think tank; The Henry Jackson Society, made the ghastly claim that:
“Europe and Islam is one of the greatest, most terrifying problems of our future. I think all European countries have vastly, very quickly growing Islamic populations.”.
Earlier in 2006, in an article for the ‘Jerusalem Post’, Shawcross who was by now a fully fledged neo con Islamophobe, poured out his bile by commenting:
“a vast fifth column” of Muslims in Europe who “wish to destroy us”; we should not shy away from labelling the problem “Islamic fascism”.
Shawcross is currently a fellow with the equally right wing ‘Policy Exchange’, whose ‘luminaries’ (sic) include: Khalid Mahmood (Labour MP, Birmingham Perry Barr), Trevor Phillips, Andrew Gilligan (who ‘broke’ the story on the Birmingham Trojan Horse claim in the Daily Telegraph) and Peter Clarke; the ‘anti- terrorism’ czar, who went on to become the Education Commissioner for Birmingham, with a specific remit to investigate alleged Islamist infiltration in schools. This appointment was made by the then Secretary of State for Education; Michael Gove, whose 2006 book; ‘Celsius 7/7’, a polemical diatribe of Islamophobic tropes, had a chapter (8) named….”The Trojan Horse”!
Nb. the erstwhile chief crown prosecutor in the north-west; Nazir Afzal, was shortlisted and interviewed during the final stages, for the role of the independent reviewer of PREVENT. Afzal became aware that his application was merely going through the motions, as Shawcross was the governments favoured candidate.
Suella Braverman, the half Hindu Mauritian Tamil/half Christian Sri Lankan, married to a zionist Jew and is a practising Buddhist herself, made it clear that she is in absolute awe of Shawcross and will (seek) to implement to fullest, his recommendations.
Shawcross started off as a darling of the left, by writing a critically acclaimed book in 1979, on the US involvement in Cambodia; only to write another book in 1984, ‘refuting’ his own previous critique! By 1992, Shawcross had fully made his transformation to the ‘right’, but writing a lickspittle biography of Rupert Murdoch. A firm neo con,
William Shawcross’s father; the late Sir Hartley Shawcross, was nicknamed “Sir Shortly Floorcross”, because it was assumed that he would defect to the Tories. However, Shawcross Sr. seemed to be more principled than his son (William) in that he remained a Labour loyalist.
Sir Hartley was the UK’s Attorney General, as well as the designated Chief Prosecutor for the United Kingdom at the Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second War War.
Ironically, should there ever be a ‘Nuremberg 2.0’, William Shawcross may well find himself being a defendant.
This is one of the best news-related comments that I have come across! Many intriguing facts are shared and carefully explained.
Perhaps, we could benefit from your news-writing prowess (if you ever wanted to consider a voluntary role at Islam21c).