UK counter-extremism programme violates human rights, UN expert says

‘Violations of the rights of religious and ethnic minorities are being enabled by ‘deradicalisation’ policies and practice,’ says special rapporteur, Lizzie Dearden reports

Prevent aims to spot and stop people’s radicalisation before they become a terror threat

Britain’s controversial counter-extremism programme violates human rights, a United Nations expert has said.

A report issued on Wednesday suggested that Prevent should be scrapped in its current form, because it targets ill-defined “extremism” as well as violence and terrorism.

The special rapporteur, Fionnuala Ni Aolain, expressed concern over the duty placed on teachers, social workers, NHS staff and others to report signs of radicalisation.

“The negative impact cannot be overstated,” the report said, saying the measures broke the “fragile trust” between communities and public services.

Professor Ni Aolain said the Prevent duty led to “overselection and overreporting” on discriminatory grounds, following years of allegations that Muslims were being disproportionately targeted.

She said it has “an impact on the rights to freedom of religion and expression and privacy”, without proper transparency about how information was used and shared across government.

Campaigners have raised concern that Prevent is threatening free speech in schools and universities, and causing the criminalisation of religious beliefs.

Ms Ni Aolain, the UN special rapporteur on the protection and promotion of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, said that all states should repeal any laws, programmes or practices that regulate “extremism”.

“They have no purchase in international law, and domestic law must comply with the principles of legality, necessity and proportionality,” she added.

“Prevention is an important and necessary tool but it will only be effective when it is practised in a way that protects and affirms rights.”

Ms Ni Aolain argued that the lack of a legal definition of extremism had sparked human rights abuses around the world, and allowed “illegitimate judgments about what extremism is”.

British counterterror police’s inclusion of Extinction Rebellion on a list of signs and symbols – which has since been recalled – showed the risk of the “inclusion of non-violent groups on executive lists of ‘extremist’ entities”, she said.

A Home Office document on the Prevent duty states that the strategy was “explicitly changed in 2011 to deal with all forms of terrorism and with non-violent extremism, which can create an atmosphere conducive to terrorism and can popularise views which terrorists then exploit”.

The UN report criticised Prevent and similar programmes in other nations for failing to properly evaluate their effectiveness or impact on human rights.

“Large-scale violations of the rights of religious and ethnic minorities are being enabled by ‘deradicalisation’ policies and practice,” Ms Ni Aolain said.

“These practices produce alienation and mistrust in the communities we need most to address the global challenges of extremist violence.”

Ms Ni Aolain stressed that her report raised universal concerns for all nations and did not constitute a review of Prevent, but said it was used as an example of “national practices that may not be fully human rights-compliant”.

Speaking to The Independent, she praised the government’s decision to launch an independent review of the strategy and said her office had offered assistance.

“What’s critical now is that the review itself really focuses on the human rights impact of this strategy,” she said.

“The very best practice that the UK can do here, which is really the best thing to do to counter terrorism, is to engage in human rights-compliant prevention.”

Research published earlier this week found that 55 per cent of British Muslims surveyed had not heard of Prevent, but that most supported its principles.

The latest report comes amid criticism over the handling of an independent review of the scheme that has been hit by delays and controversy since being promised in January 2019.

The review has not had a leader since Lord Carlile stepped down amid a legal challenge in December.

The Home Office said there would be a “full and open competition” to appoint a new reviewer, but there are concerns over whether a thorough review can be completed before its statutory deadline in August.

The government has repeatedly denied that Prevent discriminates against Muslims, and pointed to the growing number of referrals for suspected right-wing extremism.

More than 5,700 people were referred to Prevent over extremism concerns in 2018-19.

Suspected Islamists and far-right extremists each made up 24 per cent of the total, while 38 per cent were flagged over a “mixed, unstable or unclear ideology” and 14 per cent were referred over other types of radicalisation.

A quarter “required no further action” and half were passed on to other services, such as education, housing and mental health, for alternative support.

A further 23 per cent were considered by the Channel counter-radicalisation scheme, which sees people paired with “intervention providers”, such as imams or former Nazis, to help combat the ideology as their progress is regularly reviewed.

Responding to the UN report, a Home Office spokesperson said: “Prevent protects those who are targeted by terrorist recruiters.

“We all have a role to play in identifying potential terrorist activity and Prevent works in partnership with a range of organisations to keep communities and individuals safe from radicalisation.”