MPs investigate anti-extremism programme after spying claims

in UK

Spread the love

• Innocent people ‘targeted’ in intelligence swoops

• Information gathered includes sexual activities

Vikram Dodd
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 18 October 2009 22.10 BST

Keith Vaz responded to the allegations: 'It's very important this engagement takes place, but that does not mean innocent people are targeted.' Photograph: Joel Ryan/PA

A powerful committee of MPs is likely to hold a formal hearing into allegations that a government anti-extremism programme is being used to gather information on innocent Muslims.

The home affairs select committee meets on Tuesday and will discuss widening its inquiry into the £140m Preventing Violent Extremism scheme, also known as Prevent.

The hearing follows a Guardian investigation that revealed allegations that the programme, whose public aim is to prevent Muslims from being lured into violent extremism, is being used to gather intelligence about innocent people not suspected of involvement in terrorism.

Information the authorities are trying to ascertain includes political and religious views, information on mental health and sexual activity and associates, according to documents seen by the Guardian. Other documents reveal that the intelligence and information could be stored until the people concerned reach the age of 100.

The all-party committee of MPs will consider offering private evidence sessions for whistleblowers and those who believe they were affected.

Some of those making the accusations, including people involved in running Prevent-funded projects, fear losing their jobs or reprisals for speaking out.

In a further move, the civil rights group Liberty is examining the prospect of suing the government over the scheme because it may breach a guarantee of a right to privacy in the Human Rights Act.

A leading counter-terrorism expert said the scheme was trying to brand non-violent Muslims as “subversives”, which if maintained would lead to the Prevent scheme backfiring.

The government denies that Prevent involves spying on the innocent.

Keith Vaz, a Labour MP and chairman of the home affairs committee said: “We will be inquiring into these allegations. It’s very important this engagement takes place, but that does not mean innocent people are targeted. In the end that would be counter-productive.

“We have the power to offer private sessions to those who wish to bring to parliament’s attention issues concerning Prevent and its alleged gathering of sensitive information on the innocent.”

Reacting to the investigation, Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, called Prevent the biggest spying programme in Britain in modern times and an affront to civil liberties.

She said today the group would consider suing if whistleblowers came forward, which they could do confidentially.

Chakrabarti said: “We’re inviting people who feel they may have been affected to come forward to us, and we will consider litigation,” she said. “We also invite anyone who has been working on these projects and has concerns.”

Prevent is a cross-department programme, run by the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism. Its head, Charles Farr, is a former senior intelligence officer. He was reported to be the choice of some of his peers to be the next head of MI6, but lost out to Sir John Sawers.

A former Scotland Yard counterterrorism officer has warned the government about its tactics.

Robert Lambert headed a special branch unit countering extremism by working with Muslims whose views the government disliked. His Muslim Contact Unit gained respect from arch-critics of the police.

Lambert said: “Not only is it morally reprehensible to treat law-abiding Muslim citizens as a subversive threat, it is also hugely counter-productive.

“If ministers continue … they will begin to jeopardise social cohesion as well as effective and legitimate counter-terrorism in the UK.”

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: “Prevent must not become an intrusive spying programme that destroys relationships within the Muslim community and between Muslims and the rest of society.

“Combating radical Islamist ideas is one thing; gathering and keeping intelligence on the innocent is another.”

[email protected]

Source: www.guardian.co.uk, 18 Oct 2009

Spread the love

More onCivil liberties Liberty

Aylin D. Miller

Turkish Forum, Editör in Chief, if you are writing articles in English, German, Russian or Turkish and want to publish them please contact us. We are also searching for people for our Media Watch Committee.

Comments

One response to “MPs investigate anti-extremism programme after spying claims”

haluk

October 24, 2009

Spooked: how not to prevent violent extremism

by IRR News Team

17 October 2009, 00:30am

A report published today by the Institute of Race Relations finds that the government’s Prevent programme for tackling extremism fosters division, mistrust and alienation.

ENTITLED Spooked: how not to prevent violent extremism, the report suggests that the Prevent programme has been used to establish one of the most elaborate systems of surveillance ever seen in Britain.

Moreover, there are strong reasons for thinking that the Prevent progamme, in effect, constructs the Muslim population as a ‘suspect community’, fosters social divisions among Muslims themselves and between Muslims and others, encourages tokenism, facilitates violations of privacy and professional norms of confidentiality, discourages local democracy and is counter-productive in reducing the risk of political violence.

The result of a six-month research project funded by the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust, the report draws on existing policy and academic work, freedom of information requests, a roundtable discussion and thirty-two interviews with Prevent programme workers and managers in local authorities, members of local Prevent boards, voluntary sector workers engaged in Prevent work and community workers familiar with local Prevent work.

The government describes its Preventing Violent Extremism programme (known simply as ‘Prevent’) as ‘a community-led approach to tackling violent extremism’. It believes that by selectively directing resources at ‘moderate’ Muslim organisations to carry out community development and ‘anti-radicalisation’ work, it can empower them to unite around ‘shared British values’ to isolate the ‘extremists’. With hundreds of millions of pounds of funding, the Prevent programme has come to redefine the relationship between government and around two million British citizens who are Muslim.

The report’s key findings are that:

º Prevent-funded voluntary sector organisations and workers in local authorities are becoming increasingly wary of the expectations on them to provide the police with information on young Muslims and their religious and political opinions.

º The atmosphere promoted by Prevent is one in which to make radical criticisms of the government is to risk losing funding and facing isolation as an ‘extremist’, while those organisations which support the government are rewarded.

º Local authorities have been pressured to accept Prevent funding in direct proportion to the numbers of Muslims in their area – in effect, constructing the Muslim population as a ‘suspect community’.

º Prevent decision-making lacks transparency and local accountability.

º Prevent has undermined progressive elements within the earlier community cohesion agenda and absorbed from it those parts which are most problematic.

º The current emphasis of Prevent on depoliticising young people and restricting radical dissent is actually counter-productive because it strengthens the hands of those who say democracy is pointless.

Author of the report, Arun Kundnani, says that: ‘The stated aim of the government’s counter-terrorist strategy is to enable people to “go about their lives freely and with confidence”. The question we pose in this report is whether freedom and confidence for the majority can be enabled by imposing a lack of freedom and confidence on a minority – in this case, the Muslim population of Britain.’

The Institute of Race Relations is precluded from expressing a corporate view: any opinions expressed are therefore those of the authors.

Free download of Spooked: how not to prevent violent extremism (pdf file, 1.2Mb)

http://www.irr.org.uk/2009/october/ak000036.html

MPs investigate anti-extremism programme after spying claims

Comments

One response to “MPs investigate anti-extremism programme after spying claims”

Leave a Reply