In a major blow to Islamist efforts to suppress truth-tellers and intimidate critics of their radical agenda, the High Court of the United Kingdom has dismissed the defamation case filed by Islamic YouTuber Mohammed Hijab against The Spectator and its columnist Douglas Murray. The case, rooted in an article titled ‘Leicester and the downside with diversity’, exposing Hijab’s role in inciting tensions during the 2022 Leicester unrest against Hindus, is the latest episode in a broader campaign to silence voices speaking out against rising Islamist aggression in Britain and to portray Hindus as aggressors, even when they are clearly the victims.
Hijab had sued The Spectator and Murray for libel, claiming that the article falsely depicted him as a dangerous agitator who incites hatred and violence. The piece had described Hijab, whose real name is Mohammed Hegab, as a “street preacher” who provoked communal unrest during heightened Hindu-Muslim tensions in Leicester. The article cited a specific speech in which Hijab, addressing a group of masked men, mocked Hindu religious beliefs, particularly about reincarnation and whipped up crowd hostility. Hijab argued that these statements were defamatory, malicious, and had caused him financial and reputational harm, including loss of sponsorships and online revenue.
However, the High Court, in a detailed judgment delivered by Justice Steyn on August 5, 2025, rejected Hijab’s claims. The court ruled that the article’s characterisation of Hijab was “substantially true,” based on verifiable video evidence. The footage showed Hijab making inflammatory remarks against Hindus and addressing a confrontational crowd in Leicester, validating the article’s portrayal. The judge also found Hijab’s claims of financial loss unconvincing and unsupported by credible evidence. Most notably, the judgment highlighted that any damage to Hijab’s reputation stemmed primarily from his own online content rather than the reporting in The Spectator. This verdict is seen as a clear affirmation of press freedom and the right to speak truthfully on matters of public concern. For Hindus in Britain, who have faced growing intimidation, the ruling represents a rare institutional acknowledgment of the hostility they continue to endure, often underreported and deliberately misrepresented.
Leicester, a City Once Peaceful Becomes Ground Zero for Anti-Hindu Misinformation
Leicester, the city at the heart of the 2022 communal flashpoints, has long been a peaceful hub of the British Hindu community. Home to the largest Diwali celebration outside India, the city has welcomed Hindus for over 70 years and houses the second-highest Hindu population in Europe. According to demographic data, Christians form 32.4 per cent of Leicester’s population, followed by Muslims at 18.6 per cent, Hindus at 15.2 per cent, Sikhs at 4.4 per cent, and smaller numbers of Buddhists and Jews.
The 2022 violence began following India’s victory over Pakistan in the Asia Cup cricket match on 28 August 2022. Indian cricket fans, spanning multiple faiths, celebrated peacefully, as they had for decades. Chants like “Pakistan Murdabad” were raised in sporting spirit with no reference to Islam or Muslims. Yet, the crowd was confronted by an individual who became physically abusive, snatching an Indian flag and assaulting fans. Videos show that he was rebuked by a few individuals, while others calmed the situation. Despite the absence of anti-Muslim slogans, false narratives spread rapidly on social media, branding the incident a communal clash instigated by Hindu extremists.
Fueling the misinformation, left-wing activists and Islamists like Sunny Hundal and Guz Khan falsely equated peaceful Hindu cricket fans with extremists. Social media soon echoed with warnings of impending Muslim retaliation. These unfounded allegations were bolstered by an email from Chief Inspector Paul Allen to the Leicester Council of Faiths, claiming chants of “death to Muslims” in Hindi, an assertion completely lacking evidence. This inflammatory message, shared widely, stoked anti-Hindu sentiment. A later clarification from Allen on September 1 stated there was “no verifiable evidence” for such chants and urged widespread circulation of the correction. However, unlike the initial false claim, the clarification received scant attention.
Islamist Mobs Unleash Targeted Violence During Hindu Festivities
Instead, anti-Hindu aggression intensified. On September 4, during Ganesh Chaturthi celebrations, Islamist mobs launched attacks on Hindu homes. In one case, a family hosting community prayers had their door left open, signalling welcome. Eggs were hurled into the house, an act of religious desecration akin to throwing pork into a Muslim or Jewish household. When the family stepped outside, they were attacked by a group of Muslim youths, one of whom wielded a long knife. A Hindu woman trying to help her nephew was punched in the face. A van loaded with eggs, used in the attack, was seized by police but never followed up publicly.
Despite police and community leaders appealing for calm, only the Hindu community observed restraint. On September 5, Islamist mobs again swarmed Leicester’s streets. Chanting anti-Hindu and anti-India slogans, they vandalised homes and cars marked with Hindu symbols like the Aum and Ganesh murtis. A young Hindu man was stabbed. A mob chased another youth into a home and smashed its windows attempting to gain entry. Houses with Hindu markings were specifically targeted, their doors broken down and families terrorised. In one case, the attackers targeted a house simply because the sacred Hindu words ‘Shubh’ and ‘Labh’ were written above the doorway.
On September 6, violence continued. Dozens of incidents were reported: broken windows, damaged cars, and mobs banging on doors to intimidate residents. Hindu families, especially women and the elderly, were left in fear. Some families temporarily vacated their homes; others began removing religious symbols from homes and vehicles to avoid being identified as Hindus.
On September 17, a peaceful Hindu march was disrupted again. Islamists, mobilised through social media, blocked the march path by performing Namaz in the middle of the road on a Saturday. Hindus waited patiently until prayers ended, showing restraint. Yet, outside Shivalaya Temple on Belgrave Road, an Islamist youth climbed the wall, desecrated sacred saffron flags, and burned one, right in front of helpless police officers. That night, further attacks were launched on Hindu homes, businesses, and individuals. Two men survived knife attacks. Several Hindus were injured, including women and one man who was hospitalised in critical condition.
Systematic Attacks and Silence as British Hindus Live in Fear
The scale and intensity of the anti-Hindu attacks marked a grave departure from the city’s multicultural legacy. The targeted violence against Hindus, marked by knives, desecration of temples, religious flags, and homes, was not random but systematic. In the following days, Hindu families lived in fear, many keeping their children out of school, and others leaving their homes entirely. Sacred symbols like the Aum and images of Hindu deities were removed from windows and cars as families sought to avoid being identified and targeted again.
Contrary to mainstream narratives that tried to balance blame or attribute the violence to “mutual tensions,” the ground reality was starkly different. Hindus remained peaceful, responded to police appeals, and bore the brunt of escalating Islamist aggression. From false social media narratives to deliberate disinformation by public figures and selective political responses, such as MP Claudia Webbe’s vocal support for the Federation of Muslim Organisations while ignoring Hindu victims, the institutional neglect and societal apathy were glaring.
The legal victory for The Spectator and Douglas Murray comes in this broader context. It is more than just a courtroom win, it is a symbolic pushback against the relentless attempts to gaslight an entire community. It validates what British Hindus have long been saying that their peace and dignity are under assault, not just by radical elements, but by a system that too often chooses silence or complicity. This verdict, backed by evidence, affirms that telling the truth, especially when it exposes the Islamist agenda, cannot and must not be criminalised.
Comments