The UK government has been called upon by community leaders, academics and more than 200 civil organisations to withdraw a controversial review of the Prevent programme. This comes after the Home Office accepted all 34 recommendations from William Shawcross who concluded that the Prevent Programme should focus on Islamist rather than far right-terrorism.

Amnesty International, Liberty, Runnymede Trust, Child Rights International Network and many Muslim civil society organisations proposed that William Shawcross’, a former chair of the Charity Commission, review should be withdrawn.

The organisations argued that the proposal is “ideologically shaped” and threatens civil liberties and the right to free speech, raises concerns for child protection and increases the threat of discrimination.

Dr Layla Aitlhadj, director and senior caseworker at Prevent Watch, compiled hundreds of cases of people affected by the Prevent programme. An advisory collection of lawyers and academics looked over the findings and found:

• ‘Implementing Shawcross’s findings means endorsing ideologically led policy with no legal accountability or parliamentary oversight.
• Implementing Shawcross’s findings means supporting claims about increased threats of Islamic extremism without including data to back up these claims in review.
• Continuing to implement the Prevent programmes will lead to perpetuating further harms agisnst children and vulnerable adults.
• The argument that Prevent should focus less on right-wing extremism and more on “Islamist” extremism is explicitly discriminatory.’

‘At least six children are referred to Prevent every school day. Shawcross reinforces the fact that Prevent is not safeguarding yet he fails to take this to its logical conclusion, which is to remove it from schools,’ Dr Aitlhadj said.

‘Not only has Mr Shawcross fulfilled the prediction of over 100 groups that boycotted his review that this was only a political exercise, but his report signals that the “independent review” process is now a means of influence rather than of actual review. This is a subversion of the democratic process and a slide into authoritarianism. As such we call for the Shawcross report to be withdrawn,’ Professor John Holmwood stated.

Despite critism, a UK government spokeperson said that ‘the government’s first duty is to protect the public and the independent review of Prevent is strengthening our fight against radicalisation.’

‘Attempting to encourage disengagement with the programme is irresponsible and dangerous. Islamist terrorism remains the primary terrorist threat to the UK. Working with Muslim communities, who overwhelming reject these violent ideologies, is crucial to our approach.

‘Prevent activity must be proportionately directed to address this, while remaining vigilant against all other threats including the extreme rightwing.’