Police Policy on Suspect Ethnicity Fuels Prejudice, Say Racial Justice Groups
Table of Contents
A controversial policy of revealing the ethnicity and nationality of suspects in high-profile crimes is having a “devastating effect” and exacerbating prejudice across England and Wales, according to a coalition of racial justice organizations. The warning, delivered in a letter to the Home Secretary and police chiefs on Friday, underscores growing concerns that the practice is reviving harmful stereotypes and eroding public trust.
The Runnymede Trust, alongside 50 other groups, is demanding the policy be scrapped, citing research indicating a significant increase in the association between “asylum seeker” and serious crime in news reporting since its implementation in August. This shift, they argue, is falsely linking criminality with ethnicity and migration status, thereby tearing at the fabric of society.
Policy Intended to Combat Misinformation, But Backfired
The policy change, enacted by the College of Policing and the National Police Chiefs’ Council, was initially presented as a measure to proactively dispel misinformation. However, campaigners contend it has had the opposite effect, mirroring crime reporting trends from the 1970s and 1980s. “This guidance…is having a devastating impact on our country, harming our communities,” the letter states.
The concerns were initially sparked by an incident in Southport in 2024, where false claims on far-right social media falsely attributed the attack to an asylum seeker. Police subsequently clarified the attacker was a British national, but the incident fueled accusations of “two-tier policing” – the suggestion that ethnicity and nationality details are selectively released based on a suspect’s immigration status.
Data Reveals a Fivefold Increase in “Asylum Seeker” Mentions
Research conducted by the coalition reveals a stark increase in the use of ethnicity and migration-related descriptors in crime reporting. Specifically, the term “asylum seeker” appeared in articles covering serious crime five times more frequently in 2025 than in 2023, before the policy change.
This trend, according to the groups, is creating a dangerous narrative that portrays people of color as inherently criminal. “Increasingly, a suspect’s ethnicity or country of origin appears to be treated as more important than the crime itself,” the letter emphasizes, “fostering a dangerous and misleading conflation between race, migration and criminality.”
A broad range of organizations support the call for the policy’s removal, including Amnesty International UK, the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association, and Jewish Women’s Aid.
Concerns Extend to Arrest Stage Reporting
The issue extends beyond charges, with some police forces now releasing race and nationality details even at the arrest stage. A recent example involved a mass stabbing on a train, where British Transport Police (BTP) publicized the fact that both suspects were Black. While one suspect was ultimately charged and the other released without charge, the racial details dominated initial news coverage.
Shabna Begum, director of the Runnymede Trust, questioned the prioritization of this information, stating, “Why was the number of weapons used not put out by the police, which is directly relevant to the crime, more so than the ethnicity and race of the suspects?”
BTP defended its decision, stating the release of ethnicity and nationality was intended to “alleviate the spread of damaging misinformation and speculation.” The weapons details, a BTP spokesperson added, were released at a later time.
Policing in a Challenging Information Environment
The College of Policing acknowledges the challenging environment in which police operate, emphasizing the need to release accurate and timely information to counter misinformation. A spokesperson stated that the current interim guidance allows for the release of nationality or ethnicity details in high-profile or sensitive investigations where there is a “policing purpose,” such as mitigating rising community tensions or responding to significant media interest.
However, campaigners remain unconvinced, arguing that the policy’s unintended consequences far outweigh any perceived benefits. The continued focus on ethnicity and nationality, they warn, risks further marginalizing vulnerable communities and undermining efforts to build a more just and equitable society.
