Met apologises for ‘openly Jewish’ comment – then is forced to apologise again for ‘victim blaming’ statement

The Metropolitan Police have been forced to apologise again for a “victim blaming” apology that was issued earlier over an officer’s use of the term “openly Jewish” while speaking to an antisemitism campaigner who was threatened with arrest near a pro-Palestine march.

The force apologised later on Friday for causing “further offence” with its previous apology, which suggested that those who were “opposed to the protest” and had been present along the route “must know that their presence is provocative” and that they were “increasing the likelihood of an altercation”.

A fresh statement, issued on X/Twitter after the original had been deleted, said: “The use of the term ‘openly Jewish’ by one of our officers is hugely regrettable. We know it will have caused offence to many. We reiterate our apology.

“We have reflected on the strength of the response to our previous statement. In an effort to make a point about the policing of protest we caused further offence. This was never our intention. We have removed that statement and we apologise.

“Being Jewish is not a provocation. Jewish Londoners must be able to feel safe in this city.

“Our commitment to protecting the public extends to all communities across London. It’s important that our public statements reflect that more clearly than they did today.”

The antisemitism campaigner involved in the incident was Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, who was wearing a kippah skullcap when he was stopped from crossing the road near the demonstration in the Aldwych area of London on the afternoon of Saturday 13 April.

A video clip posted by the organisation showed one police officer saying to him: “You are quite openly Jewish, this is a pro-Palestinian march. I’m not accusing you of anything but I’m worried about the reaction to your presence.”

Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner Matt Twist had said earlier on Friday: “The fact that those who do this often film themselves while doing so suggests they must know that their presence is provocative, that they’re inviting a response and that they’re increasing the likelihood of an altercation.”

The Campaign Against Antisemitism said in response: “We absolutely reject this narrative from @MetPoliceUK. It is appalling, abject victim blaming.”

The incident, as well as the force’s initial statement, sparked a backlash online.

One user on X posted: “It’s not ‘regrettable’ for an officer to threaten an individual with arrest for a breach of the peace offence on the basis of appearing ‘openly Jewish’. It was racist discrimination. Call it exactly what it is. That you suggested being Jewish was a ‘provocation’ says it all.”

Another was among the many who described the situation as “embarrassing” for the Met, writing: “Christ this palava is so embarrassing. Not for me, not for us, but for the once great institution of the Met. How on earth do you expect us to accept policing by consent if you treat Jewish people so unfairly.”

Mr Falter said he had been walking in the capital after attending synagogue and was not there to counterprotest.

In the clip, another officer said to him: “There’s a unit of people here now. You will be escorted out of this area so you can go about your business, go where you want freely – or if you choose to remain here, because you are causing a breach of peace with all these other people, you will be arrested.”

The officer said Mr Falter’s presence was “antagonising”.

Mr Falter said afterwards: “Despite being told repeatedly that London is safe for Jews when these marches are taking place, my interactions with police officers last Saturday show that the Met believes that being openly Jewish will antagonise the anti-Israel marchers, and that Jews need protection, which the police cannot guarantee.

“Instead of addressing that threat of antisemitic violence, the Met’s policy instead seems to be that law-abiding Jewish Londoners should not be in the parts of London where these marches are taking place. In other words, that they are no-go zones for Jews.”

Mr Falter said he will be walking in London on 27 April, adding that no part of the capital should be unsafe.

In his initial statement, Mr Twist said the issues surrounding the ongoing protests are “complex, contentious and polarising” and create a “very difficult environment” for officers to police.

He told of a “new trend” emerging in recent weeks in which people attend protests to express opposing views, often while filming themselves. He said officers intervene to keep opposing groups apart and prevent disorder, rather than to “stifle” free speech.

In the earlier statement, Mr Twist said: “The video posted by the Campaign Against Antisemitism will further dent the confidence of many Jewish Londoners which is the opposite of what any of us want.

“The use of the term ‘openly Jewish’ by one of our officers is hugely regrettable. It’s absolutely not the basis on which we make decisions, it was a poor choice of words and while not intended, we know it will have caused offence to many. We apologise.”

The Campaign Against Antisemitism said in response: “Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley has sent Assistant Commissioner Matt Twist to blame us for putting a ‘dent in the confidence of many Jewish Londoners’ by releasing the video and claiming that the presence of Jews crossing the route of the march was ‘provocative’.

“What puts a ‘dent’ in Jewish Londoners’ confidence in the Met is the Met’s own decision to curtail the rights of Jews in order to appease lawless mobs.

“What is ‘provocative’ is telling a Jewish Londoner that his presence will ‘antagonise’ crowds and that unless he leaves he will be arrested.”

Tens of thousands of pro-Palestinian protesters gathered in London last Saturday to call for a ceasefire and urge the government to stop all arms sales to Israel. Crowds waved Palestinian flags, chanted “Free Palestine”, and held signs calling for a “ceasefire now” and an end to arms sales.