A Home Office-backed “call for evidence” on hate crime was sent to groups that have previously raised concerns over extremism.
At least three were invited to give evidence to the government-commissioned independent review, according to documents cited by the Times.
The Muslim Council of Britain (MCB), the Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) and Friends of Al-Aqsa were among the groups invited to feed into a “call for evidence” relating to new laws on public order and hate crime in the wake of the Manchester synagogue attack.
Britain’s largest Muslim leadership body, the MCB, was frozen out of formal engagement with the government in 2009 after a senior figure was accused of supporting violence against Israel.
In his 2023 review of the Prevent counter-extremism strategy, Sir William Shawcross said non-engagement remained a policy because of “unresolved extremism concerns”. The MCB claimed, however, that the review was discredited.
Meanwhile, the MAB has been named as a “cause for concern” under extremism definitions in parliament.
The group was described in 2024 by Michael Gove, then communities secretary, as a part of the “divisive forces within Muslim communities and cause real harm to them”. He referred to the MAB as “the British affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood”, which MAB denied.
Meanwhile the founder and former chair of Friends of Al-Aqsa has previously been criticised for praising Hamas.
Ismail Patel was named in a government anti-extremism review as having “previously visited [then] Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza, [and] been filmed in 2009 stating, ‘We salute Hamas for standing up to Israel’.”
Both MAB and Friends of Al-Aqsa have been listed as supporters for the Al Quds Day rally, an annual Iran-backed anti-Israel march in central London.
The Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC), which is behind the largest Gaza demonstrations, was also allegedly asked to submit evidence as part of the review aimed at “protecting communities from hate and intimidation”.
The review is expected to examine whether existing laws protect communities from intimidation and hatred and also safeguard the right to protest and free speech laws.
The Times reported that former Director of Public Prosecutions Lord Macdonald, who is leading the review, has the discretion to approach anyone deemed necessary.
Claire Coutinho, shadow equalities minister, said: “It is extremely concerning that the review is seeking advice from those who have actively fostered division.”
Founder of Muslims Against Antisemitism and Tell Mumas, Fiyaz Mughal told the Times: "It seems like the government is saying one thing and doing another thing.
"While they claim to have upheld the notion of 'no engagement', this government-commissioned review has directly asked for evidence from two groups who have a questionable history.
"The government must come clean about whether they still believe in the non-engagement policy."
Commenting on the story, a Home Office spokesperson said: "Our laws must protect the public while safeguarding the rights to protest and to free speech. That is why the home secretary asked Lord Macdonald to lead an independent review of public order and hate crime legislation.
"Lawful protest and free speech are fundamental rights, but we cannot allow them to be abused to spread hate or cause disorder. The law must be fit for purpose and consistently applied."
The MCB secretary general, Wajid Akhter, told the JC: "The MCB’s role is to represent British Muslims and engage constructively on issues that affect their rights, safety and civic life. We’re less interested in political theatre and self-appointed gatekeepers with opinions around who to engage and not, and more focused on tackling hate crime, defending civil liberties and contributing serious evidence to public debate."
An MAB spokesman said: “It is entirely proper for government to consult organisations and communities directly affected by proposed changes to legislation. In reality, this review did not proactively seek our input at all. Our inclusion came only after questions were raised about why key affected constituencies had been overlooked, which raises serious questions about how an ‘independent’ review should operate when those most affected are initially excluded.
"Claire Coutinho’s intervention appears driven more by political positioning than by principle. It is rich for her to speak of division when she repeatedly falls back on familiar culture-war framing and discredited allegations, acting as a culture-war merchant in an attempt to sow division rather than engage with the substance of the review."
On the allegation about the Muslim Brotherhood, the spokesman went on, “The recurring suggestion that British Muslim organisations are part of some vast international network is a pernicious trope that portrays Muslims as inherently foreign and suspicious. It mirrors long-standing narratives used to marginalise minority communities and is both inaccurate and profoundly Islamophobic."
Friends of Al-Aqsa told the JC that it had “no knowledge of an invite to submit any evidence to the government.”
The JC approached PSC for comment.
To get more Politics news, click here to sign up for our free politics newsletter.