Skip to content

Geopolitics & Security

Designating Hate: New Policy Responses to Stop Hate Crime


Report27th August 2019


Chapter 1

Executive Summary

Hate crime is rising in the UK and worldwide. The UK has seen a 17 per cent rise (2017-18) in hate incidents overall, while religiously motivated hate soared over 40 per cent. British Muslims are bearing the brunt of this rise: despite representing eight per cent of the UK’s religious population, they suffer 52 per cent of religious hate.

The UK has become increasingly permissive to public hate:

  • Divisive groups – especially increasingly mainstreamed far-right groups – spread hatred with relative impunity because responses to nonviolent extremism remain uncoordinated;

  • Hate incidents spike around major events, leaving communities exposed; and

  • Perpetrators of religious hate are rarely prosecuted due to gaps in legislation.

This report highlights the policy responses government should take to tackle hate crime in the UK.

The Problem: Groups that spread hate function with impunity

Government and public bodies have recognised the dangerous nature of hateful groups, including on the far right like Britain First and Generation Identity. But current laws are unable to stop groups that spread hate and division, but do not advocate violence.  

The Solution:

  • Create a new law to designate ‘hate groups’. This new tier of hate group designation would be the first of its kind in Europe and would help tackle nonviolent extremist groups that demonise specific groups on the basis of their race, religious, gender, nationality or sexuality.[_]  The new designation would sit alongside proscription but not be linked to violence or terrorism, while related offences would be civil not criminal. Unlike proscription, hate designation would be time-limited and automatically reviewed, conditioned on visible reform of the group. Powers to designate would, like proscription powers, fall under the Home Office’s remit and require ministerial sign off. Under designation, hate groups would be limited from appearing on media outlets or engaging with public institutions.

The Problem: Hate surges around major events

A steady growth in hate crime has been driven by surges around major events. Often this begins online. Around the 2017 terror attacks in the UK, hate incidents online increased by almost 1,000 per cent, from 4,000 to over 37,500 daily. In the 48-hour period after an event, hate begins to flow offline.[_]

The Solution:

  • Earmark contingency funds to protect communities around major events. Government reacted well to the threats faced by UK Muslims following the Christchurch (New Zealand) terror attack. But hate incidents still took place. A broader fund should increase protections in all public spaces after events, not just minority-specific locations such as places of worship. Access is vital to integration and hate should not be allowed to prevent people from going anywhere.

  • Develop an emergency response to online hate after flashpoints, alongside tech companies. The UK government should work with tech companies to develop a consensus response to emergency situations. This could include joint mechanisms for faster content removal or de-prioritisation of problematic content via an additional set of emergency algorithms to nip online hate in the bud before it spills offline. However, any measures taken would need to establish consensus on the trade-off between the security of users and citizens, versus restrictions on free speech. A new or existing government body could be authorised to deem an event major, requiring a more precautionary approach from companies for a set  period (for example 48 hours) following an incident. This time-limited inoculation method would prevent the need for broader and potentially less democratic blocks, like the one implemented by the Sri Lankan government in the wake of the April 2019 bombings. International initiatives like the Christchurch Call in May 2019 have already highlighted the need for coordinated approaches to eliminate terrorist and violent extremist content online; an initiative to stop hate online would be a welcome next step as part of the Online Harms White Paper process in the UK.

The Problem: Religious hate is hard to prosecute

Hate crime legislation is designed to punish those that seek to divide us. But currently, the lack of prosecutions and justice for perpetrators does nothing to deter hate, or prove government’s commitment to a cohesive society. This is particularly acute for religious hate, where only two per cent of incidents are successfully prosecuted. Legislation does not allow intersectionality to be recorded[_], exacerbating the disparity between religious and racial hate. This exposes poor data collection but also risks underplaying religious identity, making people feel it is less important than racial characteristics.

New Labour tried to equalise protections against religious hatred but was rebuffed by the House of Lords due to concerns about free speech. The Lords objections led to a higher evidence bar and narrower criteria for prosecuting religious as opposed to racial hate.

The Solution:

  • Clearly define terms related to hate crime in law, including hatred and hostility, to bring equal protection. Currently wide definitions in the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, and Public Order Act (1986), give a high and varied evidence bar. Language should be consistent, with the same phrasing for religious, racial and other forms of hatred. The UK government should share these new definitions through the Organization for Security and Coordination in Europe (OSCE), supporting efforts to tackle an international phenomenon.

  • Review the impact of offline harms. The recent Online Harms White Paper is welcome, but the biggest rise in hate crime has been offline. We rightly curtail freedom of expression when it is threatening or harmful. But harm is not properly understood, especially the unquantified impacts on chances of professional or personal success. Clear guidance would support the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to make the public interest case, and along with definitions, improve both steps of its two-stage test for prosecutions. Better understanding harm will also make it easier for juries by showing how hate intends to marginalise others.


Chapter 2

Introduction

With rising populism, divisive debates around Brexit and a continual terror threat, the UK in 2019 is polarised. Neil Basu, counter terror chief, warned that this polarisation could “lead to a rise in hate crime and a rise in disorder”.[_] This prediction has sadly been on point. Hate crimes and incidents have steadily risen since 2013, particularly for racially and religiously aggravated offences.[_]

As the College of Policing states, while not all hate crime is linked to extremism and terrorism, there is a clear overlap between hate and terrorist activity, with terrorist acts mostly motivated by hate.[_] Not only is hate a threat itself, it can lead to extreme consequences.

Hate crimes are crimes committed against someone due to their disability, gender, race, religion or any other perceived difference.[_] To be classified as a hate crime, there must be a criminal offence, where there is no criminal offence, acts can still be recorded as hate incidents.

Highly visible incidents of anti-Semitism and Islamophobia in the Labour and Conservative parties demonstrate how permissive the broader political environment in the UK has become to hate. According to monitoring group Tell MAMA, anti-Muslim attacks rose by 26 per cent last year (see figure 2).[_] Meanwhile anti-Semitic incidents rose for a third consecutive year in 2018, a rise of 16 per cent.[_]

Figure 18

Religious hate crime in the UK surged by 40 per cent between 2016-17 and 2017-18

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 1: Religious hate crime in the UK surged by 40 per cent between 2016-17 and 2017-18

Figure 19

Hate crime towards Muslims has risen sharply over the last year and is the biggest driver

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 2: Hate crime towards Muslims has risen sharply over the last year and is the biggest driver

This growth is not confined to the UK (see table 1). Anti-Semitism in France is rising dramatically,[_] and refugees in Germany are 10 times more likely to be victims of hate crime than other citizens.[_] We have also seen a sharp rise in hate in the US[_] and Canada.[_] Anecdotal evidence in New Zealand, where hate crimes are not officially recorded, show an uptick in incidents prior to the Christchurch attack.[_]

Table 1: The UK is not the only country facing a rise in hate crime, particularly for religion. Data recording in the EU is not always consistent for the motivations behind crimes.

 

Rise in Hate Crimes

Rise in Religious Hate Crime

Rise in Anti-Semitic Attacks

Rise in Anti-Muslim Attacks

UK

17%

40%

16%

26%

USA

17%

23%

37%

18.7%

Canada

47%

83%

64%

151%

France

No data available

No data available

74%

[_]

52%

Germany

No data available

No data available

20%

[_]

No data available

For hate crime laws to work, perpetrators must be held accountable and prosecuted equally across all forms of hate. But currently, the rate of prosecutions does not reflect the increase in incidents.

This lack of justice is apparent at each stage of a hate crime. Statistics from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) – a national survey collating police records and surveys to victims – suggests that reporting of hate crimes to the police is also very low and has not improved for the past 12 years, consistently staying at around 50 per cent of the expected level.[_] Religious hate crime reporting is especially low, and only an estimated 21 per cent of religiously motivated crimes are reported to the police.[_] [_] After receiving a report, the police can refer it to the CPS, which determines if it warrants a criminal offence; only two per cent pass this test to the prosecution stage[_] (see figure 3 below).

Figure 20

While available estimates suggest that 21 per cent of hate crimes are religiously motivate

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 3: While available estimates suggest that 21 per cent of hate crimes are religiously motivate

The UK government has recognised the growing problem of hate, releasing an Action Plan in 2016 (refreshed in 2018).[_] One of its aims is to increase reporting. While this is positive, reporting will remain low if victims do not think they will get justice.[_] Problems in prosecutions remain; 28 per cent of racially and religiously motivated offences closed last year without a suspect even being identified.[_]

“I have spoken out against those who spread anti-Semitism and anti-Muslim hatred…[but] Sadly we still hear incidents of intolerance, whether it’s a migrant being told they don’t belong, a disabled child being verbally abused, a Muslim woman having her veil torn off or anonymous keyboard cowards infecting the internet with hatred.”


Sajid Javid

Former Home Secretary - Hate Crime Action Plan Refresh, 16 October 2018

In 2018, the government updated the Action Plan after little progress. Some interventions like the new hate crime awareness campaign are welcome. The push to raise awareness of offences is both a deterrent and can help improve reporting rates. But interventions lack coherence across all the stages of hate crime.  Government needs to take the same attitude to hate crime as its CONTEST strategy does to counter terror: preventing hate crime, protecting the public through better preparations, and pursuing and prosecuting those culpable.

To meet this, government has three options at its disposal:

  • Cut hate off at source by implementing new laws to tackle groups that spread hate;

  • Prevent the growth of hate crime by better preparing for flashpoints, making communities feel safe wherever they are, online or offline;

  • When hate does happen, strengthen existing laws to ensure equal protection for religious and racial characteristics, better protecting British Muslims who bear the brunt of hate in the UK.


Chapter 3

Cut hate off at source

Although authorities have expressed concern about the hatred emerging from nonviolent extremist groups, the grey area between counterterrorism and hate crime laws makes it difficult to address them. Some far-right groups have exploited this loophole, despite ad-hoc attempts to curtail them.

In 2018, UK Border Force refused three anti-Islam activists entry to the UK. The activists, including the leader of far-right group Generation Identity (GI), had planned to speak at a rally at Speakers’ Corner as part of a campaign entitled Defend Europe. Reasons for refusal included the distribution of racist materials and potentially violent content in planned speeches, and other actions that threatened UK society. Despite this, the GI leader’s speech was still delivered by UK activists. GI continues to operate across the UK and Europe. Although Facebook banned their main account, local groups still have a presence, while its leader is active on Twitter.

Similarly, in March 2018 far-right group Britain First’s leaders were jailed for religiously aggravated harassment. Sentencing the leaders of Britain First, the prosecutor told the court that “these defendants were not merely exercising their right to free speech but were instead aiming religiously aggravated abuse at innocent members of the public”.[_] Both leaders have been suspended from social media, along with the main Britain First twitter account. But despite these actions and attempts to proscribe the group,[_] Britain First is still able to spread its hate via its website, YouTube and on the streets.

Despite acknowledgement from government and ad-hoc interventions, current law has been unable to stop these groups. This is because proscription is a counter-terrorism tool; this rightly gives a high bar to cross, evidenced by clear connection to violent acts. However, this leaves a gap in tackling groups that spread antipathy towards people of different race, religion, gender or nationality, specifically because of these characteristics, and who might inspire others to commit hate crimes via hate speech.  A new law to designate such groups would allow government to tackle hate before it spreads.

Table 2: Action taken against the far right - shortfalls and solutions

Groups

Government and Civil Society action

Shortfalls

Hate group designation

Generation Identity

The Austrian leader of Generation Identity wants to deliver a speech in the UK to a far-right audience

The Border Agency bars him from entering the UK on the grounds that his speech was likely to damage cohesion

Generation Identity was invited by the BBC to comment after the Christchurch attack

Designation would prevent Generation Identity from being broadcast

Britain First

Britain First leaders banged on the windows of the property of Muslim men they thought were connected to a rape trial and screamed “paedophiles” and “foreigners”

Britain First leaders were jailed for religiously aggravated harassment

Britain First was registered as a political party and contested elections until end of 2017 and is applying to register with the Electoral Commission in Northern Ireland

Designation would suspend Britain First from the electoral roll

Solution

Implement a new law that makes up for the current gap, to designate groups that spread hate

A new law should lay out clear criteria that classifies hate groups. Despite the FBI[_] and several US NGOs labelling[_] and monitoring hate groups, no country has built a tool to tackle them.  This would bring unity to ad-hoc approaches that have already been adopted, such as banning Britain First members from joining the police or British Prison Service, or no-platforming at universities.

The government’s previous attempts to implement banning orders for extremist groups struggled with the difficulties of defining nonviolent extremism and understanding its harms.[_]  Consuming nonviolent extremist or hateful material does not inevitably lead to violence. However, as the judge who sentenced Darren Osborne for the 2017 Finsbury Park terror attack stated, Osborne’s obsessive viewing of videos from Britain First and other anti-Muslim figures had played a part in his desire to attack Muslims.[_] The government faces the difficult task of recognising the harms that hate groups can cause, even if it is not manifested in violence, without appearing to limit free speech or take draconian measures.

Hate group status would help to bridge this gap. Designation would be related to proscription criteria but focus on the impact of hate, rather than terrorism and violence. This coordination would improve effectiveness through a consistent benchmark for action. For example, hate groups should always be prohibited from processions using Section 13 of the Public Order Act (1986). Unlike proscription, designation could be repealed and conditioned on reform, so groups would have less incentive to go underground and more incentive to improve their behaviour.

The below outlines our proposed mechanism and criteria for designating hate groups, based on existing UK government procedures for proscription. Such a designation could also be used to tackle Islamist groups, like Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, which has been accused of spreading anti-Semitic and homophobic hate.[_] [_]

Criteria

We define a hate group as:

  • Spreading intolerance and antipathy towards people of a different race, religion, gender or nationality, specifically because of these characteristics

  • Aligning with extremist ideologies (see Appendix, for examples of far-right and Islamist worldviews), though not inciting violence

  • Committing hate crimes or inspiring others to do so via hate speech

  • Disproportionately blaming specific groups (based on religion, race, gender or nationality) for broader societal issues

Designation mechanism

Drawing the line between free speech and hatred remains a difficult task for policymakers, but lack of intervention has resulted in greater intolerance in public discourse. Based on existing procedures for proscribing terrorist groups in the UK and mechanisms used by regulatory bodies such as the Charity Commission, we recommend that:

  • Designation would sit alongside proscription but not be linked to violence or terrorism

  • Powers to designate would, like proscription powers, fall under the Home Office’s remit

  • If a group meets the criteria above, the Home Office would serve them with a notice of investigation

  • Based on the Home Office investigation, the Secretary of State can consider designation and would bear ultimate responsibility for the decision

  • The Secretary of State would inform parliament of a decision to designate through a written statement

  • Groups could appeal the decision, which would temporarily suspend the process until review

  • The Home Office could appoint an independent oversight committee of non-governmental experts to regulate decisions and ensure transparency, similar to bodies like the Animal Science Committee  

Impact

  • Under designation, hate groups would be impeded from appearing on media outlets or engaging with public institutions

  • Like proscription, the list of designated hate groups would be publicly available to ensure coordination across institutions

  • Related offences would be civil not criminal

  • Unlike proscription, hate designation would be time-limited and automatically reviewed, conditioned on visible reform of the group

Table 3: Hate group designation vs. proscription

Hate Groups

Proscribed Groups

Hate group designation would link to hate crimes and speech

Proscription is a terror offence requiring proof of violence

Offences would be civil, not criminal

Offences are criminal, punishable by prison

Designation would punish the group, not members

Proscription punishes leaders, members and supporters

Conditions:

Allowed to meet, support or campaign

Not allowed to use media outlets or speak at universities

Not allowed to engage, work with or for public institutions

Conditions:

Not allowed to arrange, manage or address a meeting

Not allowed to wear or display supportive materials

Not allowed to belong to or invite support

Potential Groups:

Generation Identity

Britain First

Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain

Qualified Groups:

Hezbollah, March 2019

Al Muhajiroun, January 2010

National Action, December 2016


Chapter 4

Be better prepared for major events

Hate crime rises around major events. Data from Tell MAMA, Community Security Trust (CST) and the CSEW all show clear spikes of hate crimes around the EU Referendum and the three 2017 terror attacks.[_]

Figure 21

The number of racially or religiously aggravated offences recorded by the police by month

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 4: The number of racially or religiously aggravated offences recorded by the police by month

“National and global events have the potential to trigger short-terms rises in hate crime and we saw this with the significant spike following the EU Referendum in 2016.”


Chief Constable Charlie Hall

Statement, 4 April 2019

Spikes are driven by online hate. Analysis by HateLab, a publicly funded research project, found that social media is usually the first forum to react to terror attacks. From a baseline of around 4,000 daily online hate-speech incidents, spikes of 25,000, 37,5000 and 35,000 occurred after the Manchester, London Bridge and Finsbury Park terror attacks.[_] Online hate can be particularly galling as it intrudes into people’s private, protected space, heightening feelings of vulnerability.

Researchers at the LSE show these events lead to inflated levels of hate crimes against Muslims for up to three weeks.[_] This is backed up by Tell MAMA’s analysis, which found hate crime begins online in the 48 hours after an event, before spreading offline.[_] This may be due in part to Islamist-inspired terror attacks attracting more media coverage than other attacks, and for longer.[_]

After an online spike, hate flows into the public, threatening individuals and institutions. Poor preparation could further entrench withdrawal, impede integration and mask individuality. The UK government reacted well to the Christchurch attack by doubling funding to protect religious spaces in preparation for the inevitable offline growth in hate. The Places of Worship scheme is designed to protect spaces that are home to minorities. But without visible responses communities can be left feeling vulnerable. This strategy does nothing to show that minorities are safe and welcome in all public spaces.

Solution

Develop an emergency response to online hate after flashpoints, alongside tech companies

The Online Harms White Paper is an encouraging first step to prevent harm from hate speech. Our Institute has previously published on the importance of a new approach to regulating internet companies that is fit for the modern world.[_] Adopting this approach will be vital in preparing for rapid responses to flashpoints and to mitigate the harms caused by surges in online hate.

Government should work with tech companies, using their expertise to inoculate against the harm online hate causes after major incidents. Discussion should begin by identifying a shared goal in tackling flashpoints, starting from a precautionary position that acknowledges the harms of hate. Any measures taken to reduce hate during flashpoints – for example more aggressive content removal or increased downranking for a specified period through additional emergency algorithms – would need to establish consensus on the trade-off between potential harm from hate and restrictions on free speech. It would also need to confront issues of capability, such as detecting and assessing content at scale and speed.

There are already goals for turnaround times. In 2017, half of the violent extremist content on YouTube was removed in two hours.[_] The European Commission has called for a one-hour removal time for extremist and terror content.[_]  This paper outlines how to define the grey space of what counts as hatred, particularly against religion, which will further help to clarify how companies should act.

Beyond how tech companies respond is the question of which incidents are significant enough to prompt a change in how content is handled, and for how long. This call is likely to be beyond the core activities of any new tech regulator, and could instead be handled by government’s existing emergency response apparatus or a new government body with powers to deem an incident major. To guard against excessive use of these powers, there could be an automatic time limit (for example 48 hours after an event) and a process to review previous designations. This should explore whether the criteria for designation were correct and followed, and whether compliance or ‘best effort’ was acceptable. Such a joint response could avoid potentially less democratic measures, such as the Sri Lankan government’s blocking of all social media following the April 2019 bombings.

Figure 22

Current and proposed regulation to prevent online harms

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 5: Current and proposed regulation to prevent online harms

When hate moves offline, broaden current governments efforts and reserve funding to visibly protect minorities in all public spaces

While some events are unpredictable, others like elections are known in advance. The government’s “It’s not just offensive. It’s an Offence” campaign is a good place to start.[_] Around democratic events these campaigns should be expanded and pushed to the forefront. The UK needs to be prepared for an inevitable spike around its proposed departure date from the EU, and elections or a referendum around then.

Government should increase visible policing to help people feel secure. Plans to increase policing to respond to hate surging in the event of a No Deal Brexit need to be replicated for other major incidents.


Chapter 5

When hate does happen, prosecute it more effectively

Legislation around hate crime remains patchy. Prosecutions, especially for religious hate, are challenging because of a high burden of proof, inconsistent legal definitions and poor data collection.[_] By ensuring prosecutions reflect the rise in incidents, government can prove its commitment to a cohesive society.[_]

There are several laws to prosecute hate crime. The Crime and Disorder Act (CDA) (1998) covers existing criminal offences like assault or harassment if they are motivated by racial or religious reasons. Because of their divisive motivation, they carry higher sentences than the same non-aggravated offence.[_] Sections 145 and 146 of the Criminal Justice Act can also increase sentences if motivation by hate can be proven. Incitement to racial hatred is prosecuted under the Public Order Act (POA) 1986, while religious hatred is covered under the same Act as amended by the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.

The CDA gives equivalent language to prosecute for both racially or religiously aggravated offences. In the POA , however, the language for incitement, and therefore burden of proof, is different. This is affecting prosecutions; from 2007 to 2012 there were 42 guilty verdicts for racial incitement to hatred, while there were only nine for religious incitement to hatred.[_]

Table 4: New Labour tried to increase protections for religious hatred, which were ultimately thwarted by Conservatives in the House of Lords.

2001-2002

New Labour tries to outlaw incitement to religious hatred in Anti-Terrorism Crime and Security Bill, but the clause fails after opposition from the House of Lords

2004-2005

The House of Lords blocks a new attempt by New Labour to outlaw incitement to religious hatred

June 2005

New Labour introduces the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill

October 2005

The House of Lords waters down New Labour's Bill and removes references to "abusive and insulting words or behaviour" and "likelihood that it will incite racial hatred"

February 2006

Bill receives Royal Assent

In the wake of 9/11, concerned with a spike in hate crime, the Labour government tried to increase protections for religion through the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill (2006) (see table 4). Opponents of the Bill were concerned that the proposal would limit freedom to criticise or joke about religion. In the face of a public campaign, the Lords again watered down clauses, limiting protections to “threatening words or behaviour”. But lawyers warned that free speech provisions in the RRHA were so broad that prosecutors would be deterred from bring forward a case of religious incitement.[_]

These objections led to difference in defining religious incitement and a high bar of evidence to prove it. Besides the ability to ridicule, insult and abuse, the added need to prove intent and motivation behind an attack is a much higher evidence bar to cross, which is not the case for racial incitement.

To prosecute a crime the CPS has a two-stage test. The first looks to see whether there is enough evidence for both the basic crime (the attack) and the aggravating offence (racial or religious motivation). The second is whether there is public interest in bringing the case forward.

The lack of legal definitions for terms like “hatred” and “hostility” make this first stage difficult. The Lifecycle of a Hate Crime project concluded that “it is not always clear what types of conduct and language will amount to ‘hostility’”.[_]  Juries are hesitant to label attacks as racially motivated when they might have occurred in the “heat of the moment”, despite the impact and the reasoning for the attack being the same.[_] This spontaneous nature makes people wary of labelling perpetrators as racists, hindering prosecutions.

Table 5: Without clear definitions of what constitutes threatening words, and the need to prove motivation, the barrier to prosecute using the CPS two-stage test is very high for religious hate crime

Figure 23

Other European countries also struggle to balance free speech and hate

designating-hate-new-policy-responses-stop-hate-crime - Figure 6: Other European countries also struggle to balance free speech and hate

Muslims are the most likely to suffer from this disparity. Given the increased freedom to criticise religion, it is possible the law is being exploited to criticise Islam as a proxy for immigrants or different ethnicities. For example, in 2007 Law Lords ruled that “bloody foreigner” and saying “get back to your own country” could amount to racial abuse. Richard Holt, “saying ‘bloody foreigner’ is ruled racist”, The Telegraph, 28 February 2007, accessed July 2019, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1544050/Saying-bloody-foreigner-is-ruled-racist.html But far-right activists continue to denigrate Muslims, claiming that they are “invading” the UK and calling for them to “remigrate” [sic] and go back to their own countries. This leaves Muslims in the UK bearing the brunt of hate that should be illegal.

“Islam has contributed nothing but terror, barbarism and genocide, the world would be a much safer place without it.”


Jayda Fransen

Former deputy leader of Britain First - Gab Post, January 2018

A recent government review highlighted the harms experienced by British Muslims from hate.[_] Hate crime can drive individuals and groups to normalise fear, adjusting their behaviour to avoid hate. Some research points to the acute vulnerability of Muslim women to harassment, due to the visible nature of some Muslim dress and a perceived weakness of women by attackers.[_] As Muslims disproportionately suffer from hate, they are more likely to employ safety mechanisms.

Key to understanding anti-Muslim hatred is focusing on the harm it causes people. Hindus, Sikhs and non-Muslims of south Asian origin are often also wrongly targeted with anti-Muslim hatred. This frequent confusion of race and religion dispels any myth that there is no racial element to Islamophobia.

Current debates have focused too much on semantics and not enough on lived experiences. Recognising anti-Muslim hatred is not about restricting free speech, but acknowledging the harm that British Muslims are experiencing. Clear, agreed examples of hate perpetrated against religious minorities (like the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism) that take racial elements into account can help support prosecutions and make the public better aware of tropes. Government recognition of the IHRA definition has not restricted free speech.

Table 6: Stages of religious hate crime prosecution

1. Reporting

2. Legislation

3. Prosecution

Shortfalls

A very low percentage of victims of religious (and other) hate crime report it to the police

Definitions do not have legal consensus

There is a lower legal bar for religious incitement compared to race

Juries struggle labelling perpetrators as racist for ‘heat of the moment attacks’ and lack of admissible evidence

Strengths

The government has pledged to invest in measures to increase hate crime reporting in its latest Action Plan 2018

Law is equal for racially and religiously aggravated offences

Strong system in place with police being aware of need to flag hate crimes to prosecution and recollect necessary evidence

Policy Recommendations

Conduct review into why reporting of religious hate crime is low and how harm and discrimination affect it

Legislation for religious and racial incitement should be equalised

Definitions should be strengthened and clarified

Prepare a systematic program of education and research to inform CPS and juries on impact of harm and how it can be presented as evidence in court

Solution

Clarify legal definitions and therefore the conduct that amounts to religious hate crime

It is clear from the disparity in the different rates of racial and religious prosecutions that the law is inconsistent. The current government has tasked the Law Commission with reviewing the adequacy of protection of hate crime legislation.[_] This will assess whether the law is effective in protecting all groups from hatred. Others have pointed to similar issues for hate against women[_] or the disabled.[_] The Commission must see how this review can strengthen laws on religious hatred to reflect and address the increase in incidents.

Laws can be strengthened by defining terms like “hatred”, “hostility” and “grossly offensive”. This would make the evidence bar more consistent but make it clearer to assess the underlying evidence. This should be done with the aim of levelling the playing field for religiously and racially motivated hate. This is clearly supported by a majority of the British public. Sixty-five per cent say government should take stronger action to prevent discrimation on the grounds of faith.[_]

The UK is not the only country suffering from a rise in hate crime, but recording practices and definitions vary across Europe. Consistent definitions can help tackle an international phenomenon. Government should prioritise sharing its strengthened protections through the OSCE’s Democratic Institutions and Human Rights Office, helping their work supporting lawmakers, police and prosecutors across Europe.

Provide guidance to CPS and juries on the harms of hate crime, to better meet the public interest case of prosecuting hate crimes

In other areas of law, we rightly curtail free speech when it harms individuals. But there needs to be greater understanding of the harms of hate, particularly religious hate, in affecting integration, peoples’ personal lives or their chances of professional success.

Muslims suffer disproportionally from hate crime, and the disparity between race and religion in legal protection leaves them especially vulnerable. This disparity can fuel distrust in the UK legal and political system, exposing a cleavage for divisive, extremist groups to exploit. The government’s Online Harms White Paper is welcome, but the biggest growth of hate crime has been offline.[_]

A review of offline harms should inform clearer guidance on the harms of hate crime for juries and the CPS to better make the public interest case. Juries and the CPS struggle to identify the intent behind hate crimes and the balance with free speech. Clearer understanding of the harm hate causes will raise the public interest case by showing how potential incitement is motivated by the desire to divide and restrict social cohesion.

Government has struggled with the political and practical implications of recognising an official definition of Islamophobia. While that debate will continue, the combination of stronger legal definitions and greater understanding of harm overall can better protect the UK’s minority communities. This is the acknowledgement and constructive response from government UK Muslims need, without being drawn into partisan debate.


Chapter 6

Conclusion

This report is part of the Institute’s broader work on the threat of extremism to UK society, and complements recent reports on the narratives of divisive Islamist-inspired and far-right groups.

It has set out three responses government must take to stem the increasing threat of hate in Britain. By implementing new laws, we can tackle groups that perpetuate hate, and rein in the permissive environment that allows it to become mainstream. Next, by being better prepared for flashpoints, government can cut hate off at source before it has a dangerous impact. Finally, by strengthening existing laws, we can address the inequality in prosecutions between religious and racial hatred, of which UK Muslims often bear the brunt. The public are behind stronger action. No less than 79 per cent think government should have a zero-tolerance approach to hate crime.[_] Removing the threat of hate is vital to cohesive communities.


Chapter 7

Appendix 1

Table A1: A range of positions from mainstream to extreme on four key narratives of the far right

Table A2: A range of positions from mainstream to extreme on six key Islamist narratives

 

Footnotes

  1. 1.

    The Institute’s work has consistently highlighted the link between the ideas that underpin nonviolent and violent extremism and has proposed resources for governments to begin defining nonviolent extremism.

  2. 2.

    Kim Sadique, James Tangen & Anna Perowne, “The importance of Narrative in Responding to Hate Incidents Following ‘Trigger’ Events”, Tell Mama UK, November 2018, accessed July 2019, https://tellmamauk.org/wp-content/uploads/resources/Tell MAMA - Report.pdf

  3. 3.

    “How can we build community cohesion when hate crime is on the Rise?”, All Party Parliamentary Group on Hate Crime, page 4, February 2019, accessed July 2019, http://www.appghatecrime.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/APPG%20on%20Hate%20Crime%20Report%20Hate%20Crime%20and%20Community%20Cohesion.pdf

  4. 4.

    Seth Jacobsen, “Far-right terrorism threat is growing, say MI5 and police chiefs”, Guardian, 29 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/29/far-right-terrorism-threat-is-growing-say-mi5-and-police-chiefs

  5. 5.

    “Research Findings: The Relationship Between Violent and Nonviolent Islamist Extremism”, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, June 2018, https://institute.global/insight/co-existence/research-findings-relationship-between-violent-and-nonviolent-islamist

  6. 6.

    See Appendix: Methodology.

  7. 7.

    Peter Walker, “Tommy Robinson appointed as Ukip’s ‘grooming gangs adviser’”, Guardian, 22 November 2018, accessed July 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/22/tommy-robinson-ukip-grooming-gangs-adviser

  8. 8.

    Chris Baynes, “BBC defends inviting far right leader to speak about Christchurch mosque attack on Newsnight”, Independent, 16 March 2019, accessed July 2019 https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/bbc-generation-identity-christchurch-mosque-attack-newsnight-interview-a8826371.html

  9. 9.

    Weiyi Cai & Simon Landon, “Attacks by White Extremists Are Growing. So Are Their Connections”, New York Times, 3 April 2019, accessed July 2019 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/03/world/white-extremist-terrorism-christchurch.html

  10. 10.

    See Appendix: Limitations of Research.

  11. 11.

    Hayley Dixon, “Extremism definition fails Clarkson test: Government gave up on laws to fight ideology because it’s ‘too difficult’”, Telegraph, 6 April 2019, accessed July 2019 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/06/government-abandoned-creating-extremism-laws-difficult-former/

  12. 12.

    “Beyond the Incident: Outcomes for Victims of Anti-Muslim Prejudice – Tell MAMA annual report 2017”, Tell MAMA UK, 23 July 2018, p.3, accessed July 2019, https://tellmamauk.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Tell-MAMA-Report-2017.pdf

  13. 13.

    See Joe Mulhall, “Modernising and Mainstreaming: The Contemporary British Far Right”, commissioned by the Commission for Countering Extremism, 19 July 2019, accessed August 2019 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/modernising-and-mainstreaming-the-contemporary-british-far-right

  14. 14.

    “State of Hate 2018: Far Right Terrorism On the Rise”, Hope not Hate, January-February 2018, p.3, accessed July 2019 https://www.hopenothate.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/State-of-Hate-2018.pdf , p.3

  15. 15.

    Cerlan Yeginsu, “One of the U.K.’s Most Prolific Extremist Cells Is Regrouping”, New York Times, 18 May 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/18/world/europe/uk-extremist-cell-anjem-choudary.html

  16. 16.

    Hayley Dixon, “Extremism definition fails Clarkson test: Government gave up on laws to fight ideology because it’s ‘too difficult’”, Telegraph, 6 April 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/06/government-abandoned-creating-extremism-laws-difficult-former/

  17. 17.

    “The week ahead for the Commission”, Commission for Countering Extremism, UK government, 10 September 2018, accessed September 2018, https://extremismcommission.blog.gov.uk/2018/09/10/the-week-ahead-for-the-commission/.

  18. 18.

    Ben Quinn & Jason Wilson, “Anti-Islamic extremist permanently excluded from entering UK”, Guardian, 26 June 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/26/anti-muslim-extremist-martin-sellner-permanently-excluded-from-entering-uk

  19. 19.

    Tom Keatinge, Florence Keen & Kayla Izenman, “Fundraising for Right-Wing Extremist Movements: How They Raise Funds and How to Counter It”, RUSI, 31 May 2019, accessed July 2019,  https://rusi.org/publication/rusi-journal/fundraising-right-wing-extremist-movements-how-they-raise-funds-and-how

  20. 20.

    Seth G Jones, “The New Zealand Attack and the Global Challenge of Far-Right Extremism”, Center for Strategic & International Studies, 15 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.csis.org/analysis/new-zealand-attack-and-global-challenge-far-right-extremism

  21. 21.

    “Muslim Brotherhood review: main findings”, HM Government, 17 December 2015, accessed July 2019, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/muslim-brotherhood-review-main-findings

  22. 22.

    Our Institute’s work has consistently highlighted the link between the ideas that underpin

    nonviolent and violent extremism

    and has proposed resources for governments to begin defining

    nonviolent extremism

  23. 23.

    “Does the FBI investigate hate groups in the United States” FBI, accessed July 2019, https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/does-the-fbi-investigate-hate-groups-in-the-united-states

  24. 24.

    The Southern Poverty Law Group, for example, list

    100 anti-Muslim hate groups

    active in the US.

  25. 25.

    Taylor Lorenz, “Instagram Is the Internet’s New Home for Hate”, The Atlantic, 21 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2019/03/instagram-is-the-internets-new-home-for-hate/585382/

  26. 26.

    Kevin Roose, “The Making of a YouTube Radical”, New York Times, 8 June 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/08/technology/youtube-radical.html

  27. 27.

    Taylor Lorenz, “This is the data Snapchat doesn’t want you to see”, Daily Beast, 9 January 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.thedailybeast.com/this-is-the-data-snapchat-doesnt-want-you-to-see

  28. 28.

    Vikram Dodd, “Far right may exploit Brexit tensions says UK counter-terror chief, Guardian, 23 January 2019, accessed July 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/23/no-deal-brexit-incredibly-damaging-security-says-uk-counter-terror-head-neil-basu

  29. 29.

    “Christchurch shootings; Far-right attack ‘could happen in the UK too’”, BBC, 18 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47618176

  30. 30.

    “Thomas Mair: Extremist loner who targeted Jo Cox”, BBC, 23 November 2016, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-38071894

  31. 31.

    Kevin Rawlinson, “Darren Osborne jailed for life for Finsbury Park terrorist attack”, Guardian, 2 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/02/finsbury-park-attack-darren-osborne-jailed

  32. 32.

    Nadia Khomani, “Alleged neo-Nazi admits plotting murder of MP Rosie Cooper”, Guardian, 12 June 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jun/12/man-pleads-guilty-to-plot-to-labour-mp-rosie-cooper

  33. 33.

    “Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme, April 2017 to March 2018: Statistical bulletin 31/18”, Home Office, 13 December 2018, p.13, accessed July 2019, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/763254/individuals-referred-supported-prevent-programme-apr2017-mar2018-hosb3118.pdf

  34. 34.

    Vikram Dodd, “MI5 to take over in fight against rise of UK rightwing extremism”, Guardian, 28 October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/28/mi5-lead-battle-against-uk-rightwing-extremists-police-action

  35. 35.

    “Press release: National Action becomes first extreme right-wing group to be banned in UK”, HM Government, 16 December 2016, accessed July 2019, https://www.gov.uk/government/news/national-action-becomes-first-extreme-right-wing-group-to-be-banned-in-uk

  36. 36.

    The Secretary of State for the Home Department referred to Britain First as “an extremism organization that seeks to divide communities through its use of hateful narratives”: Amber Rudd, former Secretary of State for the Home Department, statement in Parliamentary Hansard, 30 November 2017,  https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2017-11-30/debates/9ED5779E-DAA6-4DF6-A558-8C7E533A469E/OnlineHateSpeech?highlight=%22britain%20first%22#contribution-2D37D022-26BE-45F0-9CDA-CB45C454B41C

  37. 37.

    Lois Beckett, “Facebook to ban white nationalism and separatism content”, Guardian, 27 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/mar/27/facebook-white-nationalism-hate-speech-ban

  38. 38.

    “Why 3 anti-Islam activists were refused entry to the UK”, BBC, 14 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43393035

  39. 39.

    Hayley Dixon, “Extremism definition fails Clarkson test: Government gave up on laws to fight ideology because it’s ‘too difficult’”, Telegraph, 6 April 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/06/government-abandoned-creating-extremism-laws-difficult-former/

  40. 40.

    “The week ahead for the Commission”, Commission for Countering Extremism, UK government, 10 September 2018, accessed September 2018, https://extremismcommission.blog.gov.uk/2018/09/10/the-week-ahead-for-the-commission/.

  41. 41.

    Ben Butcher and Micah Luxen, “How prevalent is far-right extremism?”, 19 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47626859

  42. 42.

    Milo Comerford and Rachel Bryson, The Struggle Over Scripture: Charting the Rift Between Islamist Extremism and Mainstream Islam, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, 6 December 2017, https://institute.global/insight/co-existence/struggle-scripture-islamist-extremism-mainstream-islam

  43. 43.

    Julia Ebner, The Rage: The Vicious Circle of Islamist and Far-right Extremism (London: I.B. Tauris, 2017)

  44. 44.

    Weiyi Cai & Simon Landon, “Attacks by White Extremists Are Growing. So Are Their Connections”, New York Times, 3 April 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/03/world/white-extremist-terrorism-christchurch.html

  45. 45.

    Weiyi Cai & Simon Landon, “Attacks by White Extremists Are Growing. So Are Their Connections”, New York Times, 3 April 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/04/03/world/white-extremist-terrorism-christchurch.html

  46. 46.

    Mark Fielitz, Julia Ebner, Jakob Guhl & Matthias Quent, “Loving Hate. Anti-Muslim extremism radical Islamism and the spiral of polarization: Research Report”, IDZ in association with ISD, June 2018, accessed July 2019, http://www.isdglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/IDZ_ISD_Research.pdf

  47. 47.

    Thomas Hegghammer, “The Rise of Macro-Nationalists”, New York Times, 30 July 2011, accessed July 2019, https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/the-rise-of-the-macro-nationalists.html

  48. 48.

    Toby Archer, “Breivik’s Mindset: The Counterjihad and the New Transatlantic Anti-Muslim Right” in Max Taylor, PM Currie and Donald Holbrook (eds), Extreme Right-wing political violence and terrorism (London: Bloomsbury, 2013), p. 172

  49. 49.

    Joe Mulhall, “The British Counter-Jihad Movement no longer really exists but its impact can still be felt”, LSE Blogs, 5 September 2017, accessed July 2019, http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/76438/1/The%20British%20Counter-Jihad%20Movement%20no%20longer%20really%20exists%20but%20its%20impact%20can%20still%20be%20felt%20_%20Religion%20and%20the%20Public%20Sphere.pdf

  50. 50.

    “CREST Primer: he Counter Jihad Movement”, CREST, 3 November 2016, accessed July 2019, https://crestresearch.ac.uk/resources/counter-jihad-movement/

  51. 51.

    Toby Archer, “Breivik’s Mindset: The Counterjihad and the New Transatlantic Anti-Muslim Right” in Max Taylor, PM Currie and Donald Holbrook (eds), Extreme Right-wing political violence and terrorism (London: Bloomsbury, 2013), p. 172

  52. 52.

    Shehab Khan, “Anders Breivik: Norwegian mass murderer gives Nazi salute in court appearance, The Independent, 10 January 2017, accessed July 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/anders-breivik-norway-mass-murderer-gunman-neo-nazi-salute-white-supremacist-utoya-island-2011-a7519491.html

  53. 53.

    Jason Wilson, “Cultural Marxism’: a uniting theory for rightwingers who love to play the victim”, Guardian, 19 January 2015, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/19/cultural-marxism-a-uniting-theory-for-rightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim

  54. 54.

    George Hawley, The alt-Right What everyone needs to know (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), p. 175

  55. 55.

    Jason Wilson, “Cultural Marxism’: a uniting theory for rightwingers who love to play the victim”, Guardian, 19 January 2015, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/19/cultural-marxism-a-uniting-theory-for-rightwingers-who-love-to-play-the-victim

  56. 56.

    Paul Blumenthal, “This Stunningly Racist French Novel Is How Steven Bannon Explains The World”, HuffPost, 3 June 2017, accessed July 2019, https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/steve-bannon-camp-of-the-saints-immigration_n_58b75206e4b0284854b3dc03?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvLnVrLw&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAACSwbg3s08uFQdIl8Q3eAj9TOIQGpmTFUyGiEb1AuU_taCsJtVZfyUHOEOmQX4bMj7rz_gvymlV2MOeqlzHwfu8Gj5iL1s0BumpQP5HkmbExbgattfYXM3e6C9lG3d1vnt972bWQvVc4C3QoNeceFbNUL7uIpk_VdZkjZYLkta-r

  57. 57.

    George Hawley, The alt-Right What everyone needs to know (New York: Oxford University Press, 2019), p.42

  58. 58.

    J.M. Berger, “Alt History”, The Atlantic, 16 September 2016, accessed July 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/how-the-turner-diaries-changed-white-nationalism/500039/

  59. 59.

    Dr Andreas Onnerfors, “The Great Replacement – Decoding the Christchurch Manifesto”, Centre for Analysis of the Radical Right, 18 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.radicalrightanalysis.com/2019/03/18/the-great-replacement-decoding-the-christchurch-terrorist-manifesto/

  60. 60.

    Andrew Wheatcroft and Richard Overy, The Road to War: The Origin of World War II (Vintage Digital: 2012), p.32

  61. 61.

    Margaret MacMillan, “Warnings From Versailles”, Foreign Affairs, 8 January 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/europe/2019-01-08/warnings-versailles

  62. 62.

    Isaac Stanley-Becker, “’They hate white males’: a Norwegian mass murderer inspired the Coast Guard officer accused of plotting terror, feds say”, Washington Post, 21 February 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/02/21/they-hate-white-males-norwegian-mass-murderer-inspired-coast-guard-officer-plotting-terror-feds-say/?utm_term=.44b3297209ce

  63. 63.

    J.M. Berger, “The Dangerous Spread of Extremist Manifestos”, The Atlantic, 26 February 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/02/christopher-hasson-was-inspired-breivik-manifesto/583567/

  64. 64.

    “Britain First leaders and deputy leader jailed for hate crimes”, BBC, 7 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43320121

  65. 65.

    “Jayda Fransen: Ex-Britain First deputy leader convicted over hate speech”, BBC, 29 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47750137

  66. 66.

    Jessica Guynn, “Why Facebook banned anti-Muslim group Britain First”, USA Today, 14 March 2018, accessed July 2019, https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/03/14/why-facebook-banned-anti-muslim-group-britain-first/424278002/

  67. 67.

    Paul Golding, GAB homepage, https://gab.ai/paulgolding

  68. 68.

    Nigel Copsey, Contemporary British Fascism: The British National Party and the Quest for Legitimacy (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), p.73

  69. 69.

    Peter Walker, “BNP ‘whites-only’ membership rules outlawed”, Guardian, 13 March 2010, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2010/mar/12/bnp-racist-membership-rules-outlawed

  70. 70.

    Facebook Bans UK far right groups and leaders”, BBC, 18 April 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47974579?ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_mchannel=social&ns_source=twitter&ocid=socialflow_twitter

  71. 71.

    Mike Stuchbery (@MikeStuchbery), "Martin Sellner, figurehead of Generation Identity has been *permanently* excluded from entering the United Kingdom. (via GI's Telegram channel)", tweet, 16 September 2019, accessed July 2019, https://twitter.com/MikeStuchbery_/status/1143575256503918593

  72. 72.

    Chris Baynes, “New Zealand terror attacker had financial links with European far-right group Generation Identity, Austrian chancellor reveals”, Independent, 27 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/new-zealand-terror-attack-generation-identity-austria-kurz-a8841841.html

  73. 73.

    “Anne Marie Waters suspended from Twitter”, For Britain Forum, 14 September 2018, https://forbritainforum.com/2018/09/14/anne-marie-waters-suspended-from-twitter/

  74. 74.

    Helen Pidd, Police Investigate far-right ‘invasions’ of Bradford and Glasgow mosques, Guardian, 13 May 2014, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/13/police-far-right-invasions-bradford-glasgow-mosques-britain-first

  75. 75.

    Bedfordshire Police

    in 2016 successfully obtained a civil injunction preventing Britain First organisers from entering Luton town centre and Bury Park for three years. The injunction was enforced and following a breach, one organiser was taken to court.

  76. 76.

    Gabriel Samuels, “Britain First banned from all mosques in England and Wales”, Independent, 18 August 2016, accessed July 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-first-banned-from-all-mosques-in-england-and-wales-after-police-take-out-injunction-a7196831.html

  77. 77.

    Paul Golding (@paulgolding), “Britain is a Christian country! Sharia law not welcome”, Gab post, January 2018, accessed July 2018 https://gab.com/PaulGolding/posts/6332687317216229

  78. 78.

    Paul Golding (@paulgolding), “God bless the supporters of our movement. ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS. GB.”, Gab post, January 2018, accessed March 2019, https://gab.ai/paulgolding/posts/17464404

  79. 79.

    Jayda Fransen (@jaydafransen), “The Quran calls upon Muslims to wage jihad against non-Muslims, it is as far from a ‘religion of peace’ as you could possibly get! #Islam #DeathCult”, GAB post, January 2018, accessed August 2019, https://gab.com/JaydaFransen/posts/6369321117459741

  80. 80.

    “Nick Griffin: I’m not anti-Muslim, I’m anti-Islam”, BBC, 19 April 2010, accessed July 2018, http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8629615.stm

  81. 81.

    “Ritual slaughter is a load of bull”, Generation Identity United Kingdom and Ireland, 9 February 2019, accessed July 2019,  https://www.generation-identity.org.uk/ritual-slaughter-is-a-load-of-bull/

  82. 82.

    Paul Golding (@paulgolding) “Is this what our forefathers fought and died for”, Gab post, https://gab.ai/paulgolding/posts/22290796

  83. 83.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “If current trends continue, Islam will soon pass the Church of England”. Current trends will continue until people change how they vote. If not, it’s over. Your grandchildren will ‘live’ under sharia”, tweet, 27 March 2018, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/978530242510934016

  84. 84.

    British National Party (@bnp), “Unless drastic, assertive action is taken now, in 25 years time #Britain will be close to being an #IslamicState. Islamists care very little for the environment. To help OUR environment, the best plan at this point in time is the #BNPsTenPointPlan”, tweet, 11 January 2018, https://twitter.com/bnp/status/951701580520349697

  85. 85.

    Jayda Fransen (@jaydafransen), “The (false) prophet Mohammed married Aisha when she was 6 and ‘had sex with her’ (more commonly referred to as rape) when she was 9. Muslims are told Mohammed was the perfect human whom they should emulate, therefore childbrides are considered acceptable in Islamic countries. Perverted in the extreme”, Gab post, https://gab.ai/jaydafransen/posts/17398685

  86. 86.

    “Gallery – For Britain Movement”, For Britain, https://www.forbritain.uk/gallery

  87. 87.

    British National Party (@bnp), “Good. Now let's start deporting thousands more. They hate us, claim benefits gleaned from our taxes and rape our children. What possible use are they in OUR civilised homeland?”, tweet, 21 January 2018, https://twitter.com/bnp/status/958638010706415616

  88. 88.

    Generation Identity England (@GID_England), “Police may not know the reason, but Generation Identity does. You can’t expect somewhere subjected to mass migration and multiculturalism to remain peaceful for long. Maybe when they realise this will they be able to start solving the problem. #120dB”, tweet, 28 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/968834353324265472

  89. 89.

    “Mainstreaming of anti-Muslim hatred”, Hope Not Hate, accessed August 2019, https://www.hopenothate.org.uk/research/islamophobia-hub/profiles/mainstreaming/

  90. 90.

    Erik Bleich and A. Maurits van der Veen, “Newspaper coverage of Muslims is negative. And it’s not because of terrorism”, Washington Post, 20 December 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2018/12/20/newspaper-coverage-of-muslims-is-negative-and-its-not-because-of-terrorism/

  91. 91.

    “Just another ‘routine’ night in Stockholm”, British National Party, 10 march 2017, accessed July 2019, https://bnp.org.uk/just-another-routine-night-stockholm/

  92. 92.

    Generation Identity England (@GID_England), “http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-43126804 … The numbers just keep growing, as do the prosecutions. It's staggering to think how their cries went unheard all those years. The politicians who allowed this to happen need to be brought in front of a judge. #120dB #Rotherham”, tweet, 20 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/965989381986189317

  93. 93.

    Josh Halliday, “Number of child sexual abuse victims in Rotherham raised to 1,510”, Guardian, 20 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/20/rotherham-sexual-abuse-victims-rises-to-1510-operation-stovewood

  94. 94.

    Josh Halliday, “Number of child sexual abuse victims in Rotherham raised to 1,510”, Guardian, 20 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/20/rotherham-sexual-abuse-victims-rises-to-1510-operation-stovewood

  95. 95.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “In order to prevent’community tensions’ (i.e truth about men of the religion of peace), police allowed girls to be raped in Birmingham. Just another day in the UK”, tweet, 29 March 2018, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/979245631880474624

  96. 96.

    British National Party, “Muslim rape gangs: they all knew”, Facebook post, 2 September 2018, https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBritishNationalParty/photos/pb.71523830069.- 2207520000.1554130152./10156561793015070/?type=3&theater

  97. 97.

    “Islamophobia Defined: an inquiry into a working definition of Islamophobia”, All Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims, November 2018, accessed July 2019, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/599c3d2febbd1a90cffdd8a9/t/5bfd1ea3352f531a6170ceee/1543315109493/Islamophobia+Defined.pdf

  98. 98.

    “Why 3 anti-Islam activists were refused entry to the UK”, BBC, 14 March 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43393035

  99. 99.

    “Why 3 anti-Islam activists were refused entry to the UK”, BBC, 14 March 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43393035

  100. 100.

    Paul Golding (@PaulGolding), “PETITION: STOP THE PERSECUTION OF BRITAIN FIRST! Britain First, a legal political party, is under attack by the State and the police for criticising Islam. Sign our petition to demand and end to this campaign of harassment and persecution”, Gab post, February 2018, https://gab.ai/paulgolding/posts/19608379

  101. 101.

    “Priorities”, For Britain, homepage, https://www.forbritain.uk/priorities#protect

  102. 102.

    Zack Beauchamp, “Our incel problem,” Vox, 23 April 2019, https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/4/16/18287446/incel-definition-reddit

  103. 103.

    British National Party (@bnp), “And not ONE prosecution. Where are the feminists on this issue? Are they hiding in the same PC place as the others, hoping that the crocodile will eat them last? Wake up Britain, join the #BNP”, tweet, 6 February 2018, https://twitter.com/bnp/status/961036141439930374

  104. 104.

    Jayda Fransen (@jaydafransen), “To the feminists out there”, Gab post, February 2018, https://gab.ai/jaydafransen/posts/18521809

  105. 105.

    Anne Marie Waters (@AMDWaters), “Women choose to cover in a black sack & live as slaves to religion – no problem. Women choose to wear a sexy dress and make their own money – unacceptable. “Feminism” has gone full halal”, tweet, 1 February 2018, https://twitter.com/AMDWaters/status/958931231353245696

  106. 106.

    Audrey Alexander, “Perspectives on the future of women, gender & violent extremism”, February 2019, https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/g/files/zaxdzs2191/f/Perspectives%20on%20the%20Future%20of%20Women,%20Gender%20and%20Violent%20Extremism.pdf

  107. 107.

    Generation Identity United Kingdom and Ireland, homepage, https://www.generation-identity.org.uk/

  108. 108.

    Generation Identity England (@GID_England), “http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/02/21/labour-bonfire-immigration-laws/ … Labour are secretly planning to flood us with the migrants currently camping in the Calais Jungle. It's all a ploy to recruit more voters, as they know that sooner or later we will notice their attempts to replace us. #GenerationIdentity”, tweet, 21 February, accessed July 2019, https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/966391867351937024

  109. 109.

    “Demands”, Generation Identity United Kingdom and Ireland, homepage, https://www.generation-identity.org.uk/demands/

  110. 110.

    Michael Weiss & Julia Ebner, “the strange tale of an unlikely racist slogan that went viral – to lethal effect”, Washington Post, 14 May 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/05/14/strange-tale-an-unlikely-racist-slogan-that-went-viral-lethal-effect/?utm_term=.c54527f3e9a0

  111. 111.

    “What is Generation Identity?”, Al Jazeera,  10 December 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/generation-identity-181210092457788.html

  112. 112.

    British National Party, Facebook post, 1 December 2016, https://bnp.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/rebecca_a5.pdf

  113. 113.

    Vox (@vox_es), “ No entendemos el manto de silencio impuesto por medios, políticos y feministas supremacistas en torno a las más de cien manadas que han actuado en España desde que empezó este juicio, en su inmensa mayoría formadas por inmigrantes y menas”, 24 June 2019, https://twitter.com/vox_es/status/1143181865832079360

  114. 114.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “Anne Marie Waters webcast – UKIP will not change its position on Islam”, tweet, 21 March 2018, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/976444648288849926

  115. 115.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “For Britain welcomes disillusioned UKIP members. Exit of the tyraniccal EU is a priority policy Fir Britain. We are the party which will support you to make it happen. @AMDWaters #ForBritain”, tweet, 22 January 2018, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/955482510913429505

  116. 116.

    British National Party (@bnp), “Another excuse to stay in the EU perhaps? We voted to leave. Russia is not our enemy. Our real enemies are the traitors roaming around #Westminster”, Tweet, 13 March 2018, accessed March 2019, https://twitter.com/bnp/status/973502563948654592

  117. 117.

    Generation Identity England (@GID_England), “That rally was closed down by a combination of the Berlin political class, the police and Antifa. This video shows an AfD member of the German parliament naming the guilty, anti-democratic parties. Watch and share. Channel Credit:”, Tweet, 2 March 2018, accessed March 2019, https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/969675026776588289

  118. 118.

    British National Party, Facebook post, 3 December 2018, https://www.facebook.com/OfficialBritishNationalParty/photos/pb.71523830069.-2207520000.1554130152./10156772233890070/?type=3&theater

  119. 119.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “The key point of Brexit will be free movement of people. That’s why we must strengthen public opinion against mass migration to rid ourselves of the EU”, Tweet, 23 February 2018, accessed July 2018, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/966997770891595776

  120. 120.

    “Brexit betrayal”, For Britain, https://www.forbritain.uk/brexit_betrayal

  121. 121.

    Lili Bayer, “Orban: No EU money should go to migrants”, Politico, 4 May 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.politico.eu/article/viktor-orban-budget-no-eu-money-should-go-to-migrants/

  122. 122.

    Paul Golding (@paulgolding), “We are so impressed with Viktor Orban’s no-nonsense stance on immigration that we have decided not to sue him for copyright! HUGB”, GAB post, January 2018, accessed March 2019, https://gab.ai/paulgolding/posts/17378362

  123. 123.

    For Britain (@ForBritainParty), “’Your first job is to believe to can change it’, declared For Britain leader Anne Marie Waters as around 3,000 people descended on Birmingham city centre for the first Football Lads Alliance march of 2018 #ForBritain @AMDWaters @ForBritainParty RT”, tweet, 26 March, https://twitter.com/ForBritainParty/status/978216959455170560

  124. 124.

    Generation Identity England (@GID_England), “Study Circle yesterday in #London discussing Martin Sellner's video, "Nazi-Gulag" and "Frontline of Patriots". Which discusses the importance of right wing groups who oppose mass migration to join together to help preserve our identity. #GenerationIdentity https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvRyfFjnBvk&t= …”, tweet, 14 January 2018, accessed July 2019, https://twitter.com/GID_England/status/952586633001488384

  125. 125.

    Jordan Kyle & Limor Gultchin, Populists in Power Around the Word, Tony Blair Institute for Global Change, 7 November 2019, accessed July 2019, https://institute.global/insight/renewing-centre/populists-power-around-world

  126. 126.

    “BNP Chairman Adam Walker responds to the New Zealand terror attack”, British National Party, 15 March 2019, accessed August 2019, https://bnp.org.uk/bnp-chairman-adam-walker-responds-to-the-new-zealand-terror-attack/

  127. 127.

    “March 2019 Action and News”, Generation Identity United Kingdom and Ireland, 31 March 2019, https://www.generation-identity.org.uk/march-2019-report/

  128. 128.

    “Identitarianism and Radicalisation with Generation Identity UK | Radio Europa #36”, DETV, YouTube video, 19 March 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r012_zL09ks&feature=youtu.be

  129. 129.

    Harmeet Kaur, “For the first time, Canada adds white supremacists and neo-Nazi groups to its terror organization list”, CNN, 28 June 2019, accessed July 2019, https://edition.cnn.com/2019/06/27/americas/canada-neo-nazi-terror-organization-list-trnd/index.html

  130. 130.

    “Teenage no-Nazis jailed over terror offences”, BBC, 18 June 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48672929

  131. 131.

    Alex Hern and Kevin Rawlinson, “Facebook bans Britain First and its leaders,” Guardian, 14 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/14/facebook-bans-britain-first-and-its-leaders

  132. 132.

    Samuel Gibbs and Martin Belam, “Twitter suspends Britain First leaders as it enforces new anti-abuse rules,” Guardian, 18 December 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/dec/18/twitter-enforcing-anti-abuse-rules-clean-up-act-abuse-hate-symbols-sexual-advances-violent-groups

  133. 133.

    “Britain First leaders and deputy leader jailed for hate crimes”, BBC, 7 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-43320121

  134. 134.

    “Jayda Fransen: Ex-Britain First deputy leader convicted over hate speech”, BBC, 29 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-47750137

  135. 135.

    Andrew Griffin, “Facebook bans EDL, Britain First and BNP from social network”, Independent, 18 April 2019, accessed August 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/facebook-ban-edl-britain-first-bnp-far-right-racist-immigration-islamophobic-a8876036.html

  136. 136.

    “Facebook bans UK far-right groups and leaders”, BBC, 18 April 2019, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-47974579

  137. 137.

    Jill Sherman, “Nick Griffin’s suspended prison sentence for inciting racial hatred”, Times, 9 June 2009, accessed August 2019, https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nick-griffins-suspended-prison-sentence-for-inciting-racial-hatred-000gpgj22hk

  138. 138.

    “Anne Marie Waters suspended form Twitter”, For Britain Forum, 14 September 2018, accessed August 2019, https://forbritainforum.com/2018/09/14/anne-marie-waters-suspended-from-twitter/

  139. 139.

    “Why 3 anti-Islam activists were refused entry to the UK”, BBC, 14 March 2018, accessed August 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-trending-43393035

  140. 140.

    Ben Quinn and Jason Wilson, “Anti-Islamic extremist permanently excluded from entering UK”, Guardian, 26 June 2019, accessed August 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/26/anti-muslim-extremist-martin-sellner-permanently-excluded-from-entering-uk

  141. 141.

    Vikram Dodd, “Far right may exploit Brexit tensions says UK counter-terror chief, Guardian, 23 January 2019, accessed July 2019 https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/23/no-deal-brexit-incredibly-damaging-security-says-uk-counter-terror-head-neil-basu

  142. 142.

    Some increases can be attributed to improved reporting. Yet, as outlined in the government’s updated Hate Crime Action Plan, October 2018, recent spikes in incidents continue to be of concern.

  143. 143.

    “Hate Crime Operational Guidance 2014”, College of Policing, page 101, May 2014, accessed July 2019 https://www.college.police.uk/What-we-do/Support/Equality/Documents/Hate-Crime-Operational-Guidance.pdf

  144. 144.

    “What is hate crime?” Metropolitan Police, accessed July 2019 https://www.met.police.uk/advice/advice-and-information/hco/hate-crime/what-is-hate-crime/

  145. 145.

    “Understanding Hate Incident Patterns After the Westminster Terrorist Attack of the 22nd of March 2017. Building a Pattern of Community Resilience Against Hate – What Worked?”, Tell Mama UK, 4 December 2018, accessed July 2019 https://tellmamauk.org/understanding-hate-incident-patterns-after-the-westminster-terrorist-attack-of-the-22nd-of-march-2017-building-a-pattern-of-community-resilience-against-hate-what-worked/

  146. 146.

    “Antisemitic Incidents Report 2018”, Community Security Trust, 7 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://cst.org.uk/news/blog/2019/02/07/antisemitic-incidents-report-2018

  147. 147.

    “Thousands protest against anti-Semitism in France”, BBC, 19 February 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-47300117

  148. 148.

    Daniel Wighton, “Refugees in Eastern Germany ’10 times more likely’ to be hate crime victims: report”, The Local de, 27 February 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.thelocal.de/20190227/report-refugees-in-the-former-east-are-ten-times-more-likely-to-be-victims-of-hate-crimes

  149. 149.

    “2017 Hate Crime Statistics”, FBI, Fall 2o18, accessed July 2019, https://ucr.fbi.gov/hate-crime/2017/topic-pages/incidents-and-offenses

  150. 150.

    “Canada hate crimes up 47% as Muslims, Jews and black people targeted”, Guardian, 29 November 2018, accessed July 2019,  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/29/canada-hate-crimes-rise-muslims-jews-black-people

  151. 151.

    Charlotte Greenfield & Praveen Menon, “Before Mosque attacks, New Zealand failed to record hate crimes for years”, Reuters, 30 March 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-newzealand-shooting-intelligence-anal/before-mosque-attacks-new-zealand-failed-to-record-hate-crimes-for-years-idUSKCN1RB0PW

  152. 152.

    “Rapport 2019 Du Collectif Contre L’Isalmophobie En France”, CCIF, 15 March 2019, accessed July 2019, http://www.islamophobie.net/?p=28718

  153. 153.

    David Rising, “Anti-Semitic crime in Germany up, amid uptick in hate crimes”, Associated Press, 14 May 2019, accessed July 2019, https://apnews.com/8d3e58df90b64e8b9d2d686111421079

  154. 154.

    “Hate Crime, England & Wales 2017/18, Statistical Bulletin”, Home Office, 16 October 2018, accessed July 2019 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748598/hate-crime-1718-hosb2018.pdf

  155. 155.

    “Hate Crime, England & Wales 2017/18, Statistical Bulletin”, Home Office, 16 October 2018, accessed July 2019 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748598/hate-crime-1718-hosb2018.pdf

  156. 156.

    “Hate Crime Annual Report 2017-18”, Crown Prosecution Service, October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/cps-hate-crime-report-2018.pdf

  157. 157.

    “Policy & CPS Relations”, Crown Prosecution Service, December 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/police-and-cps-relations

  158. 158.

    HM Government, “Action Against Hate The UK Government’s plan for tackling hate crime – ‘two years on’”, October 2018, accessed August 2019, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748175/Hate_crime_refresh_2018_FINAL_WEB.PDF

  159. 159.

    Significant work has been done to outline problems in access to justice more broadly, particularly for minority groups. An important example is the June 2019 report by the Muslim Women’s Network on Muslim Women’s Experiences of the Criminal Justice System.

  160. 160.

    “Hate Crime Annual Report 2017-18”, Crown Prosecution Service, October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/cps-hate-crime-report-2018.pdf

  161. 161.

    Kevin Rawlinson, “Britain First leaders jailed over anti-Muslim hate crimes”, Guardian, 7 March 2018, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/mar/07/britain-first-leaders-convicted-of-anti-muslim-hate-crimes

  162. 162.

    Labour MP Louise Haigh led a call to proscribe Britain First due to supposed connections with Labour MP Jo Cox’s murder in 2016. The perpetrator is thought to have shouted the words “Britain first” during the attack, while some claimed he was photographed attending a Britain First rally. But again, the clear link to violence was unproven.

  163. 163.

    “Does the FBI investigate hate groups in the United States”, FBI, accessed July 2019, https://www.fbi.gov/about/faqs/does-the-fbi-investigate-hate-groups-in-the-united-states

  164. 164.

    The Southern Poverty Law Group, for example, list 100 anti-muslim hate groups active in the US.

  165. 165.

    “Ministers ‘struggle to define extremism’”, BBC, 22 July 2016, accessed July 2019,  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36858631

  166. 166.

    Kevin Rawlinson, “Darren Osborne jailed for life for Finsbury Park terrorist attack”, Guardian, 2 February 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/02/finsbury-park-attack-darren-osborne-jailed

  167. 167.

    Our report Narratives of Division: The Spectrum of Islamist Worldviews in the UK provides an in-depth look at Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain’s public messaging.

  168. 168.

    Luciana Berger, MP referred to Hizb ut-Tahrir as an “anti-Semitic and homophobic organisation”: Luciana Berger, former Labour MP, statement in Parliamentary Hansard, 17 April 2018, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-04-17/debates/9D70B2B4-39D7-4241-ACF8-13F7DFD8AEB2/Anti-Semitism?highlight=hizb%20ut%20tahrir%20semitism#contribution-C1B5E17C-F421-400F-ABFF-357AC2ABAAD0

  169. 169.

    “Hate Crime Annual Report 2017-18”, Crown Prosecution Service, October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/cps-hate-crime-report-2018.pdf

  170. 170.

    Prof Matthew Williams. Prof Pete Burnap & Sefa Ozalp, “Examining online hate”, Economic & Social Research Council, 17 January 2019, accessed July 2019, https://esrc.ukri.org/news-events-and-publications/news/news-items/examining-online-hate/

  171. 171.

    Ria Ivandic, Tom Kirchmaier and Stephen Machin, “Amplifying Islamophobic hate crime: UK media in the wake of terror attacks”, Blog London School of Economics, 9 May 2019, accessed August 2019, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-media-in-the-wake-of-terror-attacks/

  172. 172.

    Kim Sadique, James Tangen & Anna Perowne, “The importance of Narrative in Responding to Hate Incidents Following ‘Trigger’ Events”, Tell Mama UK, November 2018, accessed July 2019, https://tellmamauk.org/wp-content/uploads/resources/Tell MAMA - Report.pdf

  173. 173.

    Ria Ivandic, Tom Kirchmaier & Stephen Machin, “Amplifying Islamophobic hate crime: UK media in the wake of terror attacks”, London School of Economics Blogs, 9 May 2019, accessed July 2019,  https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/the-media-in-the-wake-of-terror-attacks/

  174. 174.

    Chris Yiu, A New Deal for Big Tech: Next-Generation Regulation Fit for the Internet Age, Institute for Global Change, 1 November 2013, accessed July 2019, https://institute.global/insight/renewing-centre/new-deal-big-tech

  175. 175.

    Susan Wojcicki, “Official Blog – Expanding our work against abuse of our platform”, YouTube Google Blog, 4 December 2017, https://youtube.googleblog.com/2017/12/expanding-our-work-against-abuse-of-our.html

  176. 176.

    Paresh Dave, “YouTube, under pressure for problem content, takes down 58 million videos in quarter”, Reuters, 13 December 2018, accessed in July 2019, https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-alphabet-google-youtube/youtube-under-pressure-for-problem-content-takes-down-58-million-videos-in-quarter-idUKKBN1OC2F6

  177. 177.

    “It’s Not Just Offensive. It’s an Offence”, HM Government, accessed July 2019, https://hatecrime.campaign.gov.uk/

  178. 178.

    This may be because crimes can be recorded as being motivated by several factors. One study showed that more than half of religious hate crimes reported to the police were also recorded as race hate crimes. While the Home Office acknowledges multiple motivating factors, they fail to provide a breakdown in their official statistics.

  179. 179.

    Prosecutions are only one part of a victim’s journey toward justice. Others have done important work on victim support, restorative justice and general awareness of criminal proceedings in minority communities.

  180. 180.

    The Minister of State for the Home Department listed the legislation prosecutions are brought under for perpetrators of hate crime and racist abuse, HC Deb, 15 July, CW, accessed July 2019. https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2016-07-08.42267.h&s=public+order+act+1986+prosecutions#g42267.r0

  181. 181.

    The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice, listed the number of defendants and outcomes of trials under sections 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 29B, 29C, 29D, 29E and 29F of the Public Order Act 1986, HL Deb, 2 April 2014, accessed July 2019, https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2014-04-02a.208.1

  182. 182.

    “Religious hatred a crime from October, but exemptions are wide”, The Register, 13 September 207, accessed July 2019, https://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/09/13/religious_hatred_act/

  183. 183.

    Mark A Walters, Susann Wiedlitzka and Abenaa Owusu-Bempah with Kay Goodall, “Hate Crime and the Legal Process – Options for Law Reform”, University of Sussex, October 2017, accessed July 2019 http://www.sussex.ac.uk/law/research/projects/lifecycle-hate-crime/publications

  184. 184.

    Mark A Walters, Susann Wiedlitzka and Abenaa Owusu-Bempah with Kay Goodall, “Hate Crime and the Legal Process – Options for Law Reform”, University of Sussex, October 2017, accessed July 2019 http://www.sussex.ac.uk/law/research/projects/lifecycle-hate-crime/publications

  185. 185.

    Olivia Hambly, Joanne Rixom, Sivani Singh & Tamsyn Wedlake-James, “Hate crime: a thematic review of the current evidence”, Home Office, October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748140/hate-crime-a-thematic-review-of-the-current-evidence-oct2018-horr102.pdf

  186. 186.

    Neil Chakraborti, Jon Garland & Stevie-Jade Hardy “The Leicester Hate Crime Project: Findings & Conclusions”, University of Leicester, September 2014, accessed July 2019, https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/criminology/hate/documents/fc-full-report

  187. 187.

    “Hate Crime” The Law Commission, accessed July 2019, https://www.lawcom.gov.uk/project/hate-crime/

  188. 188.

    Maya Oppenheim, “Misogyny hate crime law necessary in light of attacks on women, say campaigners”, Independent, 14 January 2019, accessed July 2019, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/misogyny-hate-crime-police-chiefs-letter-catcalling-a8726081.html

  189. 189.

    “Does the law work for disabled people?”, Parliament, 22 January 2019, accessed July 2019,   https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmpetitions/759/75907.htm

  190. 190.

    Steve Ballinger, “Integration Green Paper: an important foundation for an ‘all of us’ approach, British Future, 14 March 2018, accessed July 2019, http://www.britishfuture.org/articles/integration-green-paper-a-foundation-for-an-all-of-us-approach/

  191. 191.

    Religious hate crimes; rise in offences recorded by police”, BBC, 16 October 2018, accessed July 2019, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-45874265

  192. 192.

    Steve Ballinger, “Integration Green Paper: an important foundation for an ‘all of us’ approach, British Future, 14 March 2018, accessed July 2019, http://www.britishfuture.org/articles/integration-green-paper-a-foundation-for-an-all-of-us-approach/

Article Tags


Newsletter

Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions
Radical Ideas
Practical Solutions