A total of 574 candidates were elected on Gaza-related or Muslim issues in the recent British local elections, according to an analysis by the Henry Jackson Society.
In other words, these are individuals whose campaign focused on Muslim transnational grievances, rather than local issues.
The 574 sectarian-style candidates were elected across 58 councils. This far exceeded HJS’s predictions ahead of polling day; HJS research had previously identified 170 sectarian-style candidates standing across more than 30 councils.
For context, this means that over 1 in 10 candidates who were elected to English local councils are Muslim sectarians.
Broken down by party, 351 of the candidates were from the Green Party, 133 were Independents, 84 from the Labour Party and 6 Liberal Democrats.
HJS noted that this distribution shows that this phenomenon cuts across traditional party boundaries and is better understood as a distinct mode of political mobilization rather than as something confined to any one party alone.
The wider pattern elucidated by HJS was that sectarian-style electoral success is associated with wards combining higher voter turnout, younger population profiles and larger Muslim population share.
Among some of the 574 candidates are Mohammed Suleman, who was elected as a Green to Newcastle despite being suspended for antisemitism.
Saiqa Ali, a Green candidate for Lambeth, was elected despite being arrested on suspicion of stirring up racial hatred by posting antisemitic statements online.
Green Party candidate for Manchester, Shams Syed, previously admitted he had “no interest in politics” apart from Gaza. He was elected.
“The focus after the results may be on which political leaders are fighting for survival, but the real battle is for the integrity of local democracy,” said Emma Schubart, Research Fellow, Henry Jackson Society.
“With 574 sectarian-style candidates elected, it is clear that this form of politics is gaining ground and cannot be ignored.”
She noted that local elections are increasingly being used to fight political battles on issues councils have no power to resolve – and that risks distorting democratic accountability.
Local councils have no power over foreign policy
The fact that local councils have no power over foreign policy was confirmed in a letter by Local Government Minister Alison McGovern on Tuesday.
McGovern’s letter was in response to a request for clarification regarding the Local Government Pension Scheme Investments in Conflict Zones.
While McGovern said she recognized that local authorities are concerned about investments linked to conflict zones, she said that “decisions on boycotts, divestment and sanctions are matters of UK foreign policy and are for central government, not local authorities.
“It is therefore not appropriate for local authorities to adopt investment policies that go beyond or differ from UK Government sanctions or foreign policy positions,” she added.
Nevertheless, the aforementioned 574 candidates were elected on the basis of Muslim transnational grievances – such as the situation in Gaza.
According to both HJS and Shadow Equalities Minister Claire Countinho, the success of these sectarian candidates is at least in large part thanks to endorsement from ‘The Muslim Vote’ campaign.
The Muslim Vote is a sectarian Muslim political campaign group aimed at making the Muslim voice “heard across the political spectrum – on issues like Palestine and much more,” according to its website.
‘Peace in Palestine’ is listed as one of its three high level pledges – with the stated aims as “Ceasefire, recognition of the State of Palestine, lifting the siege and occupation of Gaza, strengthening laws barring bilateral British trade with Settlements, denying Visas to Israeli politicians and militants involved in settlement expansion, and sanctions on all companies named by the UN as operating in occupied territories [sic].”
The Muslim Vote has scores of partner organizations, three of which have been empirically linked to terror organizations. The first of the three is the Palestine Forum in Britain, whose chair, Zaher Birawi, has been sanctioned by the US Treasury for ties to Hamas and as part of a network allegedly used to support Hamas overseas. The second is Islam Channel, a UK-based Islamic TV channel licensed by Ofcom but which has been investigated and sanctioned for broadcasting antisemitic hate speech. The third is the Muslim Association of Britain, which has reported historical ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas and has been described by UK officials as a group of concern under counter‑extremism definitions.
While not linked to terror or hate speech as such, three others – MEND, Islam21C and Prevent Watch – have all been alleged to have radical opinions and promoted antisemitism.
In a letter to X, Countinho cited some of the sectarian candidates as evidence that the Muslim Vote campaign is explicitly promoting sectarianism and antisemitism.
“These are not the views of moderate Muslims in Britain,” she said.
