The Muslim Council of Britain has today submitted written evidence to the Home Office’s Independent Review of Public Order and Hate Crime Legislation announced by the Home Secretary on 15 November.
The submission, made following an invitation from the independent review team, draws on expert legal analysis from human-rights specialists Bindmans LLP and outlines the lived experience of British Muslims and other marginalised minority communities in recent years surrounding:
- Protests and public expressions of political opinion, in particular pro-Palestine anti-genocide expression, and their parallels to the anti-apartheid movement in the decades leading up to the end of apartheid in South Africa.
- The gross mischaracterisation in irresponsible political rhetoric that such protests are a threat to the safety of Jewish individuals and places of worship despite for example, the visible and active participation of many Jewish individuals and organisations within them.
- The significant restrictions embedded within the current public order framework, as well as the vast additional powers already afforded to the police in recent years, including but not limited to the the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, Public Order Act 2023, Crime and Policing Bill (in particular the highly problematic clause 124), the burgeoning trend of use of civil injunctions and the widely perceived misuse of the Terrorism Act 2000.
- The likelihood that the introduction of any concept of “cumulative impact” will put the Government in breach of the Human Rights Act 1998. Historic movements celebrated in Britain’s rich civil rights history such as the Chartists and Suffragettes achieved progressive change through perseverance and persistent protest over time, despite significant inconvenience to those in power. Had those movements been diminished based on perceived cumulative disruption – itself a highly subjective assessment open to political pressure – much of that progress would arguably have never been achieved.
- Demonstrable inconsistencies in the application of Sections 12 and 14 of the Public Order Act 1986, including during the policing of far-right protests such as the ‘Unite the Kingdom’ protest on 13 September 2025.
- The logical fallacy and lack of parity in the Government adopting a non-statutory working definition of antisemitism in 2016 whilst still, over eight years later, not yet adopting a non-statutory working definition of Islamophobia or anti-Muslim hostility. In both cases, the right to free speech and critique can and should be re-affirmed.
- Full support for the recommendations of the Law Commission’s final report on Hate Crime Laws in December 2021, much of which remains unimplemented.
Dr Naomi Green, Assistant Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, said “History shows that protest, grounded in human rights and justice, strengthens democracy rather than weakens it and attempts to suppress it by those in positions of power should concern us all.
“Reservations have also been raised that the independence of this review has already been severely compromised by political pressure and limited transparency around the call for evidence, leaving many feeling the conclusions are already a fait accompli. Lord Ken Macdonald has a short window to allay the public of these concerns and demonstrate otherwise.”
Alice Hardy, Partner and Shirin Marker, Associate at Bindmans LLP, said, “Over recent years, successive governments have introduced a raft of anti-protest laws that have resulted in the increased criminalisation of protest and the suppression of free speech. This is particularly alarming in circumstances where the current legal framework relating to public order offences and hate crimes – and its application by the authorities – has led to what the Law Commission has described as a “hierarchy of hatred”, which places legal protections for the Muslim community below that of other religious groups.
It is incumbent on the UK government to reconsider how it applies existing legislation to peaceful protest as well as any new proposals to further restrict protest, which will only serve to reduce individual rights and weaken democracy.”
The MCB also raised a number of serious concerns with the procedure adopted by the Home Office for this review, including:
- An engagement process that appears to be limited to a targeted call for evidence to selected consultees only, rather than a public call for evidence.
- In particular, the Muslim Council of Britain understands that none of the major organisers of recent pro-Palestine anti-genocide protests were proactively invited to submit evidence.
- Comments by the Prime Minister that the review had been ordered to stop protests “breeding hatred” which strongly questions the independence of the review from political pressure.
The MCB will continue to advocate for balanced and unbiased recommendations that are grounded in common sense and fairness for all, not political pressure and vexatious lobbying.
Notes for Editors.
- For all media enquiries, contact: [email protected]