UK's Prevent strategy used to collect data on children, says new report

A new report has accused the UK government of using its controversial Prevent counter-terrorism strategy to collect and share large amounts of personal data, with children and young people particularly affected.
The report, published by Rights and Security International (RSI), reveals how data collected through Prevent referrals for safeguarding against extremism is funnelled into vast databases accessible by various UK police forces and intelligence agencies, and even potentially foreign governments.
This data can remain in government systems for decades, leading to individuals referred by the programme complaining of losing out on university places, being unsuccessful in their application for British citizenship, or losing their jobs.
RSI added that the police could also collect information on "potential referrals" from informal conversations with Prevent practitioners on individual cases that never result in a referral, significantly broadening the range of people whose data is stored in the police databases.
When a person is referred to Prevent, the police have permission to use a "full range of investigative powers against a person, including gaining access to their mobile phone location records, phone data records, and online footprint".
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
Jacob Smith, who wrote the report titled "Caught in the web: ‘Prevent’ databases and the policing of children", described the Prevent strategy as "misguided" and said the report highlighted why it should be scrapped.
"This investigation confirms what communities and parents in Britain have long feared: Prevent is not a safeguarding programme, but rather is a way for the police to create secret dossiers of information about people – particularly children," Smith told Middle East Eye.
'The widespread data-sharing and hoarding we have uncovered violates the Human Rights Act, and the government is obligated to end this law-breaking'
- Jacob Smith, Rights and Security International
"The widespread data-sharing and hoarding we have uncovered violates the Human Rights Act, and the government is obligated to end this law-breaking.
‘The government must also stop saying that Prevent and Channel are consent-based: they are not.
"These programmes have been misguided and damaging from the start, and the government should scrap them altogether. The UK needs and deserves violence prevention programmes that are based on facts, not 'gut feelings', and designed to protect everyone."
Since 2015, the UK government has referred approximately 58,127 individuals to the Prevent programme, touting it as a safeguarding tool targeting individuals vulnerable to radicalisation.
But the report highlights how children as young as eight have been referred to Prevent for wearing clothing bearing Palestinian symbols or expressing misunderstood sentiments in school.
The Prevent Case Management Tracker, the programme's central database, stores extensive personal data, including racial identity, immigration status, and social media activity.
What is the Prevent Strategy?
+ Show - HidePrevent is a programme within the British government's counter-terrorism strategy that aims to “safeguard and support those vulnerable to radicalisation, to stop them from becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism”.
It was publicly launched in the aftermath of the 2005 London bombings and was initially targeted squarely at Muslim communities, prompting continuing complaints of discrimination and concerns that the programme was being used to collect intelligence.
In 2011, Prevent's remit was expanded to cover all forms of extremism, defined by the government as “vocal or active opposition to fundamental British values, including democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect and tolerance of different faiths and beliefs.”
In 2015, the government introduced the Prevent Duty which requires public sector workers including doctors, teachers and even nursery staff to have “due regard to the need to prevent people being drawn into terrorism”.
A key element of Prevent is Channel, a programme that offers mentoring and support to people assessed to be at risk of becoming terrorists. Prevent referrals of some young children have proved contentious. 114 children under the age of 15 received Channel support in 2017/18.
Criticism of the Prevent Duty includes that it has had a “chilling effect” on free speech in classrooms and universities, and that it has turned public sector workers into informers who are expected to monitor pupils and patients for “signs of radicalisation”. Some critics have said that it may even be counter-productive.
Advocates argue that it is a form of safeguarding that has been effective in identifying and helping troubled individuals. They point to a growing number of far-right referrals as evidence that it is not discriminatory against Muslims.
In January 2019 the government bowed to pressure and announced that it would commission an independent review of Prevent. This was supposed to be completed by August 2020. After being forced to drop its first appointed reviewer, Lord Carlile, over his past advocacy for Prevent, it conceded that the review would be delayed.
In January 2021 it named William Shawcross as reviewer. Shawcross's appointment was also contentious and prompted many organisations to boycott the review. Further delays followed. Shawcross's review, calling for a renewed focus within Prevent on "the Islamist threat", was finally published in February 2023 - and immediately denounced by critics.
The information is then replicated across policing and intelligence systems, often without the individual's or their families' knowledge or consent.
Despite government claims that Prevent is voluntary, the report found that officials rarely seek consent when referring individuals.
Authorities can bypass the formal "Channel" intervention process - designed to offer support - by creating "Police-Led Partnerships," which operate in secrecy and extend surveillance powers.
Racial bias and discriminatory practices
The report underscores long-standing accusations that Prevent disproportionately affects Muslims and ethnic minorities.
Nearly 60 percent of Prevent referrals involve children, with many from Black, Asian, and Middle Eastern backgrounds.
Critics argue that the programme perpetuates racial profiling under the guise of counterterrorism.
Significantly, the report found that data on race is inconsistently collected, often based on subjective perceptions rather than self-identification.
This lack of robust data has allowed authorities to evade accountability for potential discriminatory impacts, a concern long raised by community groups.
Prevent's evolution into a surveillance apparatus has raised alarm among human rights advocates.
The report describes how police exploit Prevent data for covert operations, using invasive techniques like accessing phone records and online activity. Such practices, it argues, contravene privacy rights under the European Convention on Human Rights.
A Home Office spokesperson criticised the conclusions of the report and said parents and carers were able to request the deletion of any data collected by officers.
“We strongly reject the conclusions of this report. Data on individuals at risk of being drawn into terrorism is held by the police only temporarily, and parents or carers can request its deletion earlier, if appropriate," the spokesperson told MEE.
“All data is kept strictly confidential, except where a serious security risk arises. The Home Office does not maintain these individuals on watchlists.”
Middle East Eye delivers independent and unrivalled coverage and analysis of the Middle East, North Africa and beyond. To learn more about republishing this content and the associated fees, please fill out this form. More about MEE can be found here.