https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2025/06/15/pro-hezbollah-speaker-calls-for-activists-fight-london/
Watch: ‘Pro-Hezbollah’ speaker calls for activists to fight back at London rally
Islamic rights campaigner who addressed crowds outside Israeli embassy praised Lebanon terror group in the past
A speaker who called for protesters in London to “fight back” against Israel’s attack on Iran previously praised the terrorist organisation Hezbollah, it can be disclosed.
Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the UK-based Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), co-authored a paper in 2008 in which he wrote: “We are all Hezbollah.”
The document was produced seven years after the Government proscribed Hezbollah’s external security organisation.
In a video, Mr Shadjareh was seen addressing crowds outside the Israeli embassy in London on Friday.
Speaking through a microphone, Mr Shadjareh said: “Is the way forward running to United Nations or to international courts or to go down to Metropolitan Police to come and support to stop genocide?
“No. The only way. The only way is to fight back.
“The only way is that those of us who are refusing to accept these genocidal tenden[cies] – to stand against it and when we do, we all become part of the resistance.”
Mr Shadjareh, who was born in Iran and is now in his 70s, has previously been quoted as describing Ayatollah Khomeini – the cleric who became Iran’s supreme leader after the 1979 revolution – as “a torch of light for the whole of mankind”.
Earlier this year, The Telegraph reported how the Iran-linked IHRC wrote to councils and universities calling on them to boycott Holocaust Memorial Day.
The group argued that it was “morally unacceptable” that Gaza was not included as a “genocide” alongside the Holocaust.
It describes itself as a campaign, research and advocacy non-profit which “struggles for justice for all peoples”.
Set up in 1997, it has special consultative status with the economic and social council of the United Nations.
The organisation was criticised in the 2023 independent review of the Prevent counter-terror strategy by Sir William Shawcross, who described it as an “Islamist group ideologically aligned with the Iranian regime, that has a history of extremist links and terrorist sympathies”.
On Saturday, more pro-Palestine protesters were seen holding Iranian flags as they took to the streets for yet another mass gathering.
One protester was seen holding a sign which called on Yvette Cooper, the Home Secretary, to “de-proscribe Hezbollah”.
A slogan on the other side of the same sign read “de-proscribe Hamas”.
Commenting on the marches over the weekend in London, Suella Braverman, the former home secretary and attorney general, said: “Yet more hate marches on our streets… show the total failure of multiculturalism and break down of the rule of law in London. I worry for Britain’s future if this hate is allowed to continue.
“The Iranian regime funds global terrorism and so any support for the Iranian regime in Britain must be treated the same way as supporting al-Qaeda or IS.
“The Iranian regime hate our way of life and want to destroy us. This is why the Government must stop being so weak and proscribe the IRGC, the main sponsor of global terrorism.
“The Government and police’s lack of action puts us all at risk.”
A spokesman for the Jewish Leadership Council said: “Iran has been behind numerous failed plots on UK soil, foiled by our security services. Iran is a direct threat to British people. That there are those who are willing to march in support of this regime should be a concern to us all.”
A Met spokesman said: “We continue extensive engagement with communities impacted by the recent international conflict to provide reassurance and to ensure their safety and security.
“This week we have conducted reassurance patrols, liaised with places of worship and engaged with Jewish and Iranian communities and the wider Middle Eastern diaspora in London.
“We have also deployed additional resources in Central London to ensure protests taking place across the capital pass by safely and to deal with any offences.
“A team of detectives focused on public order cases is ready to investigate incidents that come to light after a protest, identifying offenders and taking action as appropriate.”
The Telegraph has approached the IHRC for comment.
————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
Dear Ms Parker,
Thank you for your email of 15 June 2025.
Your email was sent on a Sunday at 2.26pm with a request for a response by 5pm. The article was then published the same day at 7pm. The timeframe in terms of both the day and the window to reply were wholly inadequate. We suspect you were aware of this and your statement stating “right to reply” was a performative gesture designed to give the illusion of balance before publication.
You then go on to state: We will be leading off the fact that IHRC’s chair Massoud Shadjareh addressed crowds on Friday outside the Israeli embassy on Friday and said, as part of a speech “the only way is to fight back” and “we are all the resistance”.
The part of Mr Shadjareh’s speech that you are referring to is from this video footage from 15 June 2026 https://youtu.be/1waJpV8OCaQ?si=gfDN1077LV7ZeI46 where he states:
3.45 …The only way is fight back. The only way is for us to unite. The only way is that those of us who are refusing to accept this genocidal tendency to stand against it and when we do, we all become part of the resistance. From Yemen to Beirut from New York to Berlin we are all part of the resistance and will be successful and we will be victorious…
In accordance with international humanitarian law, wars of national liberation have been expressly embraced, through the adoption of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (pdf), as a protected and essential right of occupied people everywhere.
In 1974, resolution 3314 of the UNGA prohibited states from “any military occupation, however temporary”. The resolution not only went on to affirm the right “to self-determination, freedom and independence […] of peoples forcibly deprived of that right,[…] particularly peoples under colonial and racist regimes or other forms of alien domination” but noted the right of the occupied to “struggle … and to seek and receive support” in that effort.
In 1982 UNGA resolution 37/43 established the lawful entitlement of occupied people to resist occupying forces by any and all lawful means. The resolution reaffirmed “the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.”
As outlined above, the Telegraph failed to inform its readers the right to resist is enshrined in international law reiterated by UN Special Rapporteur, Francesca Albanese (Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967). There is, therefore, nothing controversial in stating “The only way is fight back” and “we are all part of the resistance” as this was a clear call for resistance against war, genocide, and injustice — principles shared by right-minded people around the world. The use of the phrase “fight back,” in the context of civilians being massacred in Gaza and cities in Iran being bombed, is entirely appropriate and legally protected. As stated, under international law, people have a right to resist genocide, occupation, and crimes of aggression.
In your email you state:
In 2008 Mr Shadjareh previously co-authored a paper in which he wrote “We are all Hezbollah” – seven years after the organisation was proscribed by the UK Government.
The article states:
A speaker who called for protesters in London to “fight back” against Israel’s attack on Iran previously praised the terrorist organisation be disclosed.
Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the UK-based Islamic Human Rights Commission (IHRC), co-authored a paper in 2008 in which he wrote: “We are all Hezbollah.”
The document was produced seven years after the Government proscribed Hezbollah’s external security organisation
Though you refer to the paper being authored seven years after the government proscribed Hezbollah’s external security organisation, you deliberately fail to mention Hezbollah was proscribed as a whole only in 2019. The clear insinuation being left for Telegraph readers to conclude Mr Shadjareh supports a proscribed organisation. This constitutes defamation.
The word ‘Hezbollah’ translated in English means ‘the party of Allah’ and is found several times in the Qur’an, for example,
Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him – those are the party of Allah . Unquestionably, the party of Allah – they are the successful (Quran 58:22); or
Then surely the party of Allah are they that shall be triumphant (Quran 5:56).
Mr Shadjareh, as a practising Muslim, was referring to these verses of the Quran in the statement “We are all Hezbollah.”
In the article you state:
Earlier this year, The Telegraph reported how the Iran-linked IHRC wrote to councils and universities calling on them to boycott Holocaust Memorial Day.
It is clearly established in our Letter re Holocaust Memorial Day to councils and universities – IHRC we have not in any way “promoted” a wholesale boycott of Holocaust Memorial Day per se. We clearly state in the conclusion of our letter, and which is lacking in the article:
Our request to the HMD Trust to include Gaza has been met with silence. We feel this is morally unacceptable.
It undermines a key aim of such commemorations which is to go beyond mere remembrance and take practical measures to ensure that “Never Again” means precisely that. The failure of the HMD Trust to respect such an axiomatic principle speaks to the racial exclusivism that has come to characterise the official commemoration.
For these reasons, we would request that you boycott the official HMD Trust commemoration and replace it with alternatives [our emphasis] that recognise the horrific genocide taking place in front of our very eyes.
We note the article failed to provide a link to our letter to councils and universities to afford readers the opportunity to make a balanced and informed determination about our stance on Holocaust Memorial Day. Please see Letter re Holocaust Memorial Day to councils and universities – IHRC
This statement, made as a statement of fact, is, therefore, inaccurate, false and misleading and has no factual basis.
In the article you state:
The organisation was criticised in the 2023 independent review of the Prevent counter-terror strategy by Sir William Shawcross, who described it as an “Islamist group ideologically aligned with the Iranian regime, that has a history of extremist links and terrorist sympathies”.
Your article failed to mention that hundreds of Muslim-based and many non-Muslim civil society organisations, including Amnesty International, were highly critical of the review. In their press release of February 2023, Ilyas Nagdee, Amnesty International UK’s Racial Justice Director stated ‘The review is riddled with biased thinking, errors and plain anti-Muslim prejudice.’
Amnesty joined a coalition of 17 human rights and hundreds of community groups in a boycott of the Shawcross-led review, citing serious concerns about bias and a pattern of behaviour which demonstrated the Government’s unwillingness to seriously interrogate the Prevent Duty. https://www.amnesty.org.uk/press-releases./uk-shawcross-review-prevent-deeply-prejudiced-and-has-no-legitimacy
Your article has failed to provide your readers with alternative independent views of the Shawcross report. The statement is therefore inaccurate and misleading.
You state in the article:
On Saturday, more pro-Palestine protesters were seen holding Iranian flags as they took to the streets for yet another mass gathering.
One protester was seen holding a sign which called on Home Secretary, to “de-proscribe Hezbollah.”
A slogan on the other side of the same sign read “de-proscribe Hamas.”
Calling for the deproscription of an organisation is a lawful and protected form of political expression in the United Kingdom. Such advocacy is not unusual and has been exercised in public forums, including in Parliament, involving MPs and peers from across the political spectrum.
For example, Lord Hylton, publicly advocated for the deproscription of the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)—a group also designated as a terrorist organisation in the UK. He praised Abdullah Öcalan as “the key for peace in the Middle East” and posed formal parliamentary questions about the de-listing of Hamas. Lord Judd likewise reminded Parliament that meaningful peace processes—such as in Northern Ireland—only began when space was made for dialogue with political wings of armed movements – this was within the context of discussing Hamas. Lord Alton advocated for the delisting of the Mujahideen-e-Khalq (MKO), despite its controversial history. Their statements, while sometimes provocative, were accepted as part of legitimate, democratic political discourse.
The above is supported by section 4 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Furthermore, no individual who carried such placards was arrested.
Your article then quotes Suella Braverman. Her description of a peaceful protest as a “hate march” is ironic as is her appeal to the “rule of law” since she was recently found by the courts to have acted unlawfully by attempting to suppress protest rights through illegitimate use of her powers. Quoting her exposes the article’s bias and lack of journalistic integrity.
Neither Mr. Shadjareh nor the Islamic Human Rights Commission has ever advocated unlawful action. We will continue to challenge state violence, war, and double standards wherever they occur — through peaceful protest, legal advocacy, and principled public engagement. Attempts to delegitimise this work through distortion, innuendo, and smear — especially by outlets that routinely support Western military aggression while vilifying communities from the Global South — only reinforce the urgency and necessity of what we do.
For transparency, please note that we publish all correspondence with journalists in full to prevent misrepresentation or selective quoting.
