21 May 2025 | Europe and Central Asia, Israel, Middle East and North Africa, News and features, Palestine, United Kingdom
On Saturday 17 May, veteran human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell was arrested. Tatchell is no stranger to arrest. When he celebrated his 70th birthday in January 2022, his post marking the occasion said he’d been arrested 100 times. At the end of that year he added another one to the list, this time in Qatar, where he was protesting the country’s criminalisation of LGBTQ+ people ahead of the World Cup. That arrest wasn’t exactly surprising. Qatar doesn’t tolerate protest, much as it doesn’t tolerate gay people.
But Saturday’s arrest was different. Tatchell was detained in central London while peacefully partaking in a large-scale pro-Palestine march. Another twist: Tatchell believes he was reported to the police by the protest organisers themselves because his message called out Hamas, as well as the Israeli government. He was carrying a placard that read: “STOP Israel genocide! STOP Hamas executions! Odai Al-Rubai, aged 22, executed by Hamas! RIP!” The police also said Palestine march stewards told them he shouted “Hamas are terrorists”, which he firmly denies.
Let’s pause here for a moment. For the past two months protests have been taking place in Gaza against Hamas. In response, Hamas has reportedly issued orders via one of its Telegram channels for the execution of all “traitors and troublemakers”. Odai Al-Rubai was one of them. According to his family he was brutally beaten and his lifeless body dumped outside his home with the message: “This is what happens to people who criticise Hamas.” According to Tatchell, who wrote a blog post on his website in response to Saturday’s arrest, others have suffered a similar fate.
Tatchell’s point was simple: if you care about Palestinian lives, you should care about all the forces threatening them – including Hamas. For that, he says, he was told by a small minority of protesters at the start of the march to “fuck off”, “get out of here” and called “Zionist scum” (the police incidentally did nothing) before being reported on and taken away.
The idea that calling out Hamas somehow makes you an enemy of the Palestinian cause is bonkers, frankly. And yet this idea has taken hold. I’ve experienced this myself. In the past 19 months I’ve frequently criticised Israel for its attacks on freedom of expression (and human rights more broadly). But the moment I mention Hamas, the tone shifts. Eyes roll. The atmosphere chills. It’s not just that people seem uncomfortable with the idea of pulling up anyone from Gaza, there’s a suggestion there too: “well, you would say that – you’re Jewish”.
For me the response has been frustrating – if we’re talking about freedom of expression violations we have to be consistent. Hamas isn’t exempt. Eye roll all you want; for others though, the treatment has been far worse. Add to the Tatchell example these: A recent report looking at the state of freedom of expression in the UK arts sector detailed how an artist was bullied out of a collective for criticising Hamas; Ahmed Fouad Alkhatib, a Gazan peace activist living in the USA, is relentlessly targeted online — including with death threats — for condemning the group.
Such division, and the inconsistency in approach, is deeply unhelpful. At Index on Censorship we frequently defend the right of peaceful pro-Palestinian voices to be heard because they absolutely have experienced significant silencing – around the world, including in the UK – and that is wrong. Now some within those same spaces are turning on others. It’s a textbook case of free speech for me, not for thee – and it too is wrong.
That the police complied might also look like an anomaly. In truth, it was the result of several disturbing patterns converging. Tatchell was arrested at a protest, and whilst standing in a designated area, something he was forced to point out to the police. Stories like this are fairly par for the course with UK demonstrations these days since the last government pushed through sweeping anti-protest laws. In one of the most stark signs of police overreach, 87-year-old Holocaust survivor Stephen Kapos was questioned earlier this year under caution by police in connection to his peaceful involvement in a pro-Palestine demonstration in January.
In many of these cases, the police don’t seem to be exercising much judgment. With Tatchell, they acted on a report and arrested a protester whose placard was critical, not hateful. He was accused of “racially and religiously aggravated breach of the peace”, and of being part of a counter-protest movement. Perhaps they saw the word Hamas and jumped to the conclusion that he was promoting the group? Perhaps they didn’t read his words before it accusing Israel of genocide? Perhaps they didn’t see his “Free Palestine” badge?
Whatever the reason, it’s lazy work. The police appear to be acting more like blunt algorithms than sentient beings, and it’s not unique to Tatchell. As The Economist warned in its latest issue, police in Britain are arresting 30 people per day for speech online, double the 2017 rate. Some are for serious crimes, while others are for posts that people have found offensive, which fall short of the threshold of being a crime.
So his arrest wasn’t surprising. But it was, and is, deeply worrying. And it was a reminder of several important things, one being that the UK’s draconian protest laws need to go. Several organisations are fighting the new legislation and others need to join in. Beyond these laws the police need to be better trained on the nuances around speech. Their job is to keep the public safe, not to reach for handcuffs every time someone gets reported on.
Finally, those in the protest movement who treat Hamas as beyond reproach should pause to reflect on the name Odai Al-Rubai – a young protester silenced by the very group claiming to defend his people. Great movements can come undone by the authoritarianism within them that they fail to confront, as much as by their enemies. To protect the cause, protesters must stop defending those who would never defend them.
20 Feb 2025 | Israel, Middle East and North Africa, News and features
Following the grotesque scenes of Hamas celebrations in Gaza, we pay tribute to the journalist and human rights activist Oded Lifshitz, whose body has been identified by his family.
Although the grandfather was long retired, he was remembered by colleagues around the world as one of the first journalists to report on the notorious 1982 massacre of Palestinians at the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps in Lebanon.
Lifshitz worked for many years on the left-wing Israeli daily paper Al HaMishmar, which closed in 1995. Its slogan was “For Zionism, Socialism and Brotherhood Amongst Nations” and was often criticised by the religious right in Israel for its liberal stance.
Lifshitz, aged 83 at the time of his capture, was known as a campaigner for Israel’s Bedouin Arab community and was reported to be responsible for a high court case that returned some of their land. In retirement he worked for the organisation Road to Recovery, which helped Palestinians cross the Erez border from Gaza into Israel to receive medical treatment. He and his wife Yocheved, who was also kidnapped by Hamas but released in October 2023, were lifelong peace activists.
Lifshitz was one of the founders of Kibbutz Nir Oz, a village less than seven kilometres from the Gaza border. The kibbutz was destroyed in the attacks of 7 October 2023 and it is thought that nearly half of its 400 residents were kidnapped, killed or injured.
The National Union of Journalists general secretary Laura Davidson today paid tribute: “Our sincere thoughts are with Oded Lifshitz’s family at this difficult time. Like many, we had hoped for the safe release of the journalist committed to peace. Journalists worldwide will no doubt share their deepest condolences with his loved ones today.”
In a statement, the Lifshitz family said: “We received with deep sorrow the official and bitter news confirming the identification of our beloved Oded’s body. 503 agonising days of uncertainty have come to an end.
“We had hoped and prayed so much for a different outcome. Now we can mourn the husband, father, grandfather, and great-grandfather who has been missing from us since October 7.
“Our family’s healing process will begin now and will not end until the last hostage is returned.”
At Index on Censorship, we join in offering our condolences to the family of this exemplary journalist and campaigner. Sadly, he never contributed to Index. Tragically, he never will.
5 Apr 2024 | Israel, News and features, Opinion, Palestine, Ruth's blog
The 21st century has simultaneously brought the world closer together and driven communities further apart. Technological advancements have enabled us to be more aware of the gift humanity can bring to the globe and of our unshaking ability to wreak so much damage.
This dichotomy of hope and hate has been sharply placed into focus in the Middle East.
This weekend marks the six-month anniversary of the horrific 7 October attacks on Israel.
Every night we turn on our televisions and witness the pain and suffering of peoples who yearn for peace.
1,269 children, women and men were brutally murdered by Hamas, with hundreds more tortured and taken hostage. This barbarity ignited a conflict between Israel and Hamas which, as of 5 March, has claimed the lives of 30,228 Palestinians and 1,410 Israelis.
Each person behind these faceless numbers leaves behind a pit of grief for loved ones which will never be filled.
The pain and suffering inflicted by the 7 October attacks have reverberated throughout communities, both in the Middle East and in countries across the planet. The war is leaving behind a trail of devastation and despair. Lives have been lost, families shattered, and entire communities torn apart. The aftermath of such violence cannot be overstated, and the scars it leaves behind run deep.
While Index on Censorship typically centres its efforts on defending freedom of expression, we cannot turn a blind eye to the urgent humanitarian crisis which has unfurled before us. It is crucial that we acknowledge the human toll of such conflicts and recognise the need for immediate action to alleviate the suffering of those affected.
In times of crisis, it is essential that the international community comes together to provide support and assistance to those in need. We must renew our efforts to secure a lasting peace in the region and work towards addressing the root causes of conflict.
This means prioritising humanitarian aid, securing the release of the hostages and ensuring that those devastated by the 7 October attacks receive the assistance they so desperately need. It also means holding accountable those responsible for perpetrating violence and ensuring that justice is served for the victims.
But beyond immediate relief efforts, we must also work towards addressing the underlying issues that fuel such conflicts. This includes addressing issues of inequality, injustice, and discrimination, which often serve as breeding grounds for violence and extremism.
As we reflect on the six-month anniversary of the 7 October attacks, let us not forget the human faces behind the headlines – the families mourning loved ones, the children traumatised by violence, and the communities struggling to rebuild in the aftermath.
As we look ahead, let us honour the memory of those we have lost by working tirelessly towards a future where such senseless violence is but a distant memory. Together, we can create a world where freedom, dignity, and human rights are upheld for all.
15 Mar 2024 | Iran, Israel, News and features, Newsletters, Palestine, Russia
A great privilege of working at Index is, and always has been, the amazing people we get to encounter, those who look tyranny in the face and don’t cower. Iranian musician Toomaj Salehi is one such person. This week, the 2023 Index Freedom of Expression arts award winner donated the £2500 cash prize to relief funds for those affected by the floods in Iran’s Sistan and Baluchistan province in an act of extreme generosity. We were informed of the donation by his family.
Salehi, whose music rails against corruption, state executions, poverty and the killing of protesters in Iran, has spent years in and out of jail. Today he is still not free – indeed he faces a court hearing on another new charge tomorrow. Our work with him doesn’t end with the award. But what solace to know that the money will make a tangible difference to the lives of many and that jail cannot stop Salehi from his mission to make Iran a more just country.
While Salehi, and others, confront the brutal face of censorship, those in the USA and the UK are this week dealing with the finer print – who owns what. The US House of Representatives passed a bill on Wednesday that will require TikTok owner ByteDance to sell the popular video-sharing app or face a total ban. This is challenging territory. TikTok is guilty of its charges, shaping content to suit the interests of Beijing and data harvesting being the most prominent. So too are other social media platforms. If it is sold (which is still an if) we could see a further concentration of influential apps in the hands of a few tech giants. Is that a positive outcome? And how does this match up against the treatment of USA-based X? The social media platform, formerly Twitter, has Saudi Arabia’s Kingdom Holding, the investment vehicle of Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, as its second largest investor. Is the US Government holding X to the same standards?
Meanwhile, the UK government (which has expanded the definition of extremism this week in a concerning way) plans to ban foreign governments from owning British media, effectively saying no to an Abu Dhabi-led takeover of the Telegraph. We have expressed our concerns about the buyout before and these concerns remain. Still, we’d like to see the final proposal before deciding whether it’s good news.
We’ve also spoken a lot this week about the decision by literary magazine Guernica to pull an article written by an Israeli (still available via the Wayback machine here) following a staff-walk out. We stand by everyone’s right to protest peacefully, of which walking out of your office is just that. But we are troubled by other aspects, specifically redacting an article post-publication and the seemingly low bar for such a redaction (and protest), which hinged on the identity of the author and a few sentences. We can argue about whether these sentences were inflammatory – I personally struggle to see them as such – and indeed we should, because if we can’t have these debates within the pages of a thoughtful magazine aimed at the erudite we’re in a bad place.
Speaking of a bad place, Russia goes to the “polls” today.
