An 11-year-old grade school pupil was mentioned the government’s controversial counter-radicalisation Prevent programme after an educator mistook the word “alms” for “arms” during a classroom discussion.
The boy’s teacher asked what pupils would do if they found themselves in possession of tons of cash . consistent with a legal challenge against the varsity lodged by the boy’s parents, he said he would “give alms to the oppressed”. The teacher interpreted this as “give arms to the oppressed” and made the Prevent referral.
When police received the referral they said there was no substance thereto , no sign of radicalisation, extremist views or any threat to national security and closed the case.
The boy’s parents are taking action against the varsity , accusing it of applying a stereotype about his racial and non secular background. It involves a written apology from the varsity , the payment of damages and therefore the expunging of the Prevent referral from the boy’s record.
Attiq Malik of Liberty Law Solicitors, representing the boy’s family, involved the Prevent programme to be scrapped and said it had been simply not working.
Advertisement
“Criminal legislation and safeguarding policies have always existed to guard the general public and vulnerable members of our society. there’s no need for a policy which is that the equivalent of employing a sledgehammer to crack a nut.”
The case is analogous to others that have hit the headlines including a nursery worker thinking a four-year-Muslim child had drawn an image of his father with a cooker bomb when he was pertaining to a cucumber and a 10-year-old Muslim boy who misspelled the word “terraced” as “terrorist” to explain the type of house he lived in.
The boy’s father, an engineer and company manager, and his mother, a dentist, say they’re distraught as a results of the Prevent referral. they’re concerned that albeit the case was swiftly closed by police in Warwickshire and West Mercia, the referral will stay their son’s file and therefore the information are going to be passed on to the grammar school the boy is thanks to attend in September.
“This has had a huge impact on us as a family. My wife hasn’t slept properly since this happened. we would like answers and that we want justice. All pupils should be treated equally and with integrity,” the boy’s father said.
He said it had been particularly distressing that the varsity had not discussed the Prevent referral with the family before making it. The referral the varsity made, seen by the Guardian, states that the boy “lives with mum and pop – attends an area mosque”.
In response to an issue on the referral form about whether consent was obtained before sharing the boy’s personal data the teacher who referred the boy wrote: “Work in class – haven’t contacted parents.”
According to government guidance on Prevent, consent from the person involved should be obtained wherever possible before sharing information about them. It adds that the need and proportionality of a referral should be assessed taking under consideration the danger to the individual and to other members of the general public .
The school has described the kid as “a extremely smart 11-year-old boy”.
His father says that he reads widely. The Prevent referral states that his comments are beginning to stick out as “non-typical” for a boy his age thanks to his interest in medieval history, war, siege engines and soldiers.
The boy’s father says his son is involved charity work like helping him pack food parcels at the local interfaith bank . He added that he often stayed behind after school to assist his teacher clear up the classroom.
Dr Layla Aitlhadj, the director of Prevent Watch, said: “Historically, the govt response has been to background such incidents as misapplications and anomalies which will be fixed. However, such cases show quite the opposite: that Prevent injects suspicion and discrimination deep into the imagination of frontline workers to the detriment of Muslims.”
The headteacher of the boy’s grade school said: “It wouldn’t be appropriate on behalf of me to comment publicly on individual children, but as a faculty , we do everything we will to stay all our pupils safe and well. we’ve an ethical and liability to hunt specialist advice from many various professionals as needed .”
0
0
