What is Jihad Means?

 

What does Jihad mean and why wasn't a pro-Palestine protester arrested for chanting the word?

The Metropolitan Police's stance created an apparent clash with the government.

 The Metropolitan Police appear to be at conflict with the government regarding what constitutes lawbreaking and lawful protest, as seen by their refusal to detain a man caught on camera yelling phrases such as "jihad" during a pro-Palestine demonstration over the weekend.

 The force added that specialized counterterrorism officers had not found any evidence of any offense related to the video that showed the Islamist organization Hizb Ut-Tahrir holding a demonstration apart from the main rally.

"The lesser jihad is where you pick up a weapon and fight alongside your fellow Muslims or the group that's fighting in self-defense or to remove an injustice or oppression," he stated.

 However, there are some restrictions regarding a military jihad, which can only be declared by a Khalifa, or Muslim ruler, who is in charge in accordance with Sharia, or Islamic law.

"The rules include the killing of civilians not being permitted, religious buildings cannot be targeted, and prisoners of war must be treated humanely," stated Mr. Mogra.

 "Sadly, the word jihad has been so grossly misunderstood as it's portrayed in the media and public discourse, even as it's expressed by Muslim people from time to time, where none of the conditions are being met yet they may want to label that as a jihad when it's anything but."

He described jihad as a "very noble thing for Muslims where you risk your life or lay down your life to protect others or liberate others," however stated: "No individual Muslim in this country can call for a jihad because that's not for us as UK citizens to do."

Why didn't the demonstrator get prosecuted and arrested?

 Expert officers from the Met stated they had reviewed the footage and found no evidence of any crimes; similarly, Crown Prosecution Service attorneys came to the same conclusion.

"However, recognizing the way language like this will be interpreted by the public and the divisive impact it will have, officers identified the man involved and spoke to him to discourage any repeat of similar chanting," the police said in a statement.

How has the reaction been?

 Reaction to the Met's statement came from Jewish organizations and certain government officials.

The Jewish safety organization Community Security Trust chastised the force, claiming that "they gave the impression of legitimizing obnoxious and hateful behavior that may or may not be criminal but nevertheless causes profound concern to British Jews and many other people" by "trying to communicate complex and nuanced legal issues" on social media.

 

However, Home Office minister Robert Jenrick claimed that "inciting terrorist violence" is what happens when people yell the term in London streets, and the Home Secretary questioned Met commissioner Sir Mark Rowley about the force's handling of the incident.

 Live in politics: Sunak pledges £20 million in aid to Gaza.

What is meant by Jihad?

 As the Met noted, the term has "several meanings," including struggle or endeavor as well as holy combat, while being occasionally linked to terrorism.

 "That word has had an affiliation with terrorists, but actually has an enormous amount of legitimacy in the Islamic faith," stated Nick Aldworth, a former national coordinator for counterterrorism.

The phrase contains two strands and signifies "struggle" or "strive" in Arabic, according to Leicester imam Shaykh Ibrahim Mogra.

Greater jihad, according to him, is the constant battle "to better yourself, to be a better human being, a better Muslim - kind, caring, peaceful."

Robert Jenrick, a minister at the Home Office, stated that chanting the phrase in the capital's streets is "inciting terrorist violence" and needs to be dealt with strictly. Meanwhile, Suella Braverman used her Monday meeting with Sir Mark to demand "an explanation over the response to incidents" that occurred on Saturday.

 A source close to the home secretary stated prior to the meeting that "there can be no place for incitement to hatred or violence on Britain's streets and, as the home secretary has made clear, the police are urged to crack down on anyone breaking the law."

What does the law say?

 The government's independent assessor of terrorist laws, Jonathan Hall KC, claims that in evaluating the incident, police and prosecutors would have examined both public order and terrorism laws.

 Encouraging terrorism, whether domestically or internationally, is illegal. It is also illegal to solicit support for Hamas, a terrorist organization that was declared completely banned in 2021.

 Furthermore, public order laws typically only come into play when someone "was calling for immediate unlawful violence against people who happen to be present," according to Mr. Hall, who added that "it would be quite difficult" to prove that a chant "might encourage terrorism."

"People chanting that word could be committing an offense in some contexts," Mr. Aldworth stated.

 "When passions are high, do you make it worse by wading in and arresting people and possibly creating violent disorder on the streets of London?" he asked, highlighting the challenges of policing huge gatherings in the city.

 "The wonderful thing about British policing is individual officers are empowered with a great degree of individual discretion about how they deal with those matters."

Do we need stricter laws?

 According to Mr. Hall, he was trying to find out if the law might be "tweaked" so that similar occurrences might be prosecuted in the future.

 "I would like to see a clear rule that prevents people crying for jihad during public protests about the Middle East," he stated. "I don't think at the moment the law does that."

 After meeting with Suella Braverman, Sir Mark made the suggestion to journalists that legislation pertaining to extremism and hate crimes be revised.

 "The laws that have been created in response to hate crimes and terrorism in recent decades have not fully considered the ability of extremist groups to circumvent those laws and spread truly toxic messages through social media," he stated. It's probably necessary to redraw those lines."

 

He had advocated for this change even before he was appointed head of the Met, having co-authored a report in which Sir Mark warned of a "gaping chasm" in the law that permits some radicals to act "impunity"

He stated that he was "shocked and horrified by the ghastliness and volume of hateful extremist materials and behavior which is lawful in Britain" .

 The leader of the Labouré Party, Sir Keir Starmer, has also called on the government to consider resolving "gaps in the law" and stated: "Tragically, there has been a huge increase in hate crime in the last few weeks." Regardless of our political affiliation, it is our collective responsibility to suppress hate crimes.

 "Since the police are autonomous in their operations, these are their decisions to make.

 "I think there have already been identified some gaps in the law in a previous review under this government and I think the government needs to look at whether there are gaps in the law that need to be addressed as well."

However, Downing Street stated that more authority for police is unlikely to be granted.

 The official spokesperson for the prime minister stated: "We do believe the police have extensive powers in this space and we will continue to discuss with them so there is clarity and agreement about how they can be deployed on the ground."

 When asked if plans were underway to grant police greater authority, the spokesperson replied, "I'm not aware of any, no."