Anti-terror police question schoolboy for wearing pro-Palestine badge

Teenager referred by his teachers after trying to raise money to help Palestinian children

Under the controversial Prevent strategy, schools have a legal obligation to report signs of extremism
Under the controversial Prevent strategy, schools have a legal obligation to report signs of extremism

A schoolboy has been questioned by anti-terrorism police because he wore a "Free Palestine" badge to school.

Rahmaan Mohammadi's teachers at Challney High School for Boys in Luton referred him to police under Prevent - the controversial government anti-radicalisation programme, which critics have claimed is heavy-handed, discriminatory and ineffective.

As well as wearing pro-Palestine badges and wristbands, Mohammadi was in possession of a leaflet advocating Palestinian rights by pressure group Friends of al-Aqsa. He had also asked for permission to fundraise for children affected by the Israeli occupation.

Friends of al-Aqsa is a non-profit NGO which defends the human rights of Palestinians under the Israeli occupation. The group's supporters are currently boycotting the Co-op, after the company's banking arm shut down the Friends of al-Aqsa account "without explanation".

State of Palestine: Dozens protest killing of naked, mentally ill man by Egyptian forces

Bedfordshire police visited Mohammadi's home with a folder of information about the schoolboy, and spoke with him and his parents. They concluded that he was not at risk and no further action was taken.

Mohammadi described his experiences at a meeting of campaign group Students Not Suspects at Goldsmiths University in London. He alleged that police warned him not to talk about Palestine in school, and further claimed that staff members had approached his 14-year-old brother and pressured him to to tell Rahmaan to "stop being radical".

Last year, hundreds of academics signed an open letter in the Independent criticising the "chilling effect" of the Prevent strategy on free speech and political dissent in the UK.

The £40m programme has been plagued with problems since its inception 12 years ago. Critics say it has fostered an atmosphere of Islamophobic paranoia which is more likely to fuel radicalisation than prevent it.

Internal police statistics obtained via a Freedom of Information request suggest only 20% of people referred to Prevent are assessed as at risk of radicalisation.

Prevent also came under fire last year for exending its legal obligation of surveillance into nursery schools, since which time children as young as three have been referred under the programme.

Bedfordshire Police told the Sunday Times: "The officers spoke to the boy and were satisfied that he was not at risk and he was given advice and support."

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in