Shabana Mahmood bans Al Quds march after Metropolitan Police warn of disorder

Confirmed: Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood has approved a request from the Metropolitan Police to ban the Al Quds march planned in London. The decision, framed by police as necessary to prevent serious public disorder, exposes a gap between a routine policing approach that favours conditions and the Met’s assertion that this event presents uniquely high risks.

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood and Metropolitan Police decision details

Confirmed: The Metropolitan Police sought a prohibition of a demonstration planned for Sunday, and Shabana Mahmood approved that request on the ground it was necessary to prevent serious public disorder. The Met announced the ban will be in place from 11: 00 am ET on Wednesday, 11 March and will last one month. The force described the threshold to ban a protest as high and noted this is the first time it has used the power since 2012.

Documented: The Met framed the decision as narrowly focused on risk, saying the ban aims to reduce the risk of injury, arrests and property damage. The force also stated that, should a stationary demonstration proceed, police would be able to apply strict conditions and that those who crossover into criminality will face the full force of the law.

Al Quds march organisers and past incidents cited by the Met

Documented: The Met described the Al Quds march as “uniquely contentious, ” noting its origin in Iran and saying in London it is organised by the Islamic Human Rights Commission, an organisation the Met described as supportive of the Iranian regime. The Met also recorded that the annual al quds march had drawn criticism after organisers expressed support for the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

Documented: The force pointed to past policing outcomes, stating previous Al Quds marches have resulted in arrests for supporting terrorist organisations and antisemitic hate crimes. The Met further noted that several counter-protests had been planned for the same day, and that the scale of expected protestors and counter-protestors factored into its assessment that placing conditions would not be sufficient.

Assistant Commissioner Ade Adelekan, MI5 and Counter Terrorism Policing references

Documented: Assistant Commissioner Ade Adelekan, the Met’s public order lead, said the decision followed an assessment that the march raises unique risks and challenges. The Met asserted it routinely polices hundreds of protests and can often manage risks by placing conditions on time, route and duration. Yet the force concluded this particular event presented a level of risk beyond those tools.

Documented: The Met cited the broader security environment in its reasoning. It referenced public statements from the security services that identify threats from the Iranian regime, and said MI5 and Counter Terrorism Policing have in the last year foiled more than 20 Iranian state-backed attacks on the UK. The force also noted recent arrests under the National Security Act and an arrest linked to an alleged stabbing tied to opposing views on the Iranian regime.

The context does not confirm what specific operational intelligence, if any, directly ties plans for the banned march to an imminent attack or named perpetrators. What remains unclear is whether the Met’s decision rests on discrete, march-specific intelligence or on a wider judgment about how international events and prior incidents increase the probability of disorder in this instance.

Open question: The record shows the Met balanced two strands of practice. On one hand, the force emphasises a track record of policing many protests by applying conditions. On the other, it cites national security work and past arrests when asserting this march could not be managed by conditions alone.

Confirmed: The Met said it has engaged with representatives from Jewish and Muslim communities and with Iranians, and that engagement will continue into the weekend. The force framed the ban as a response to a risk assessment of this specific protest and counter-protests, and stated it does not police taste or decency or prefer one political view over another.

If MI5 or Counter Terrorism Policing confirm that operational intelligence identifies a specific, imminent threat tied to plans for the march, it would establish that the ban responded to a concrete present danger. Absent that confirmation in the record provided, the available evidence documents a broader-risk judgment by the Metropolitan Police that elevated this Al Quds demonstration above other protests the force usually manages with conditions.