Metropolitan Police Refuse to Investigate Sadiq Khan’s Defence of “From the River to the Sea” Chant Despite Recording It as a Hate Incident
- Dr Chan Abraham
- 3 days ago
- 2 min read
A public interest complaint has today been escalated concerning Sadiq Khan Mayor of London to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) and the Information Commissioner after the Metropolitan Police repeatedly refused to investigate Khan for potential incitement to racial hatred.
On 10 October 2025 Khan publicly declared that the chant “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” – a phrase explicitly calling for the elimination of the world’s only Jewish state – is not antisemitic. The Mayor’s remarks were broadcast nationally.
The detailed complaint of 13 October 2025 cited the chant’s origins in the 1964 PLO Charter and the 1988 & 2017 Hamas Covenants, U.S. Congressional condemnations, and expert testimony that the phrase is understood as a call for Jewish expulsion or worse.
Despite this evidence, and despite recording Khan’s action as a non-crime hate incident (ref 01/8225922/25) – thereby acknowledging the presence of hatred – the Met has refused to open a criminal investigation, citing undisclosed “legal advice”.
The force is also 28 working days overdue on a Freedom of Information request for disclosure of that legal advice.
Community safety and social justice campaigner Dr Chan Abraham said today:
“The Metropolitan Police think nothing of arresting Christian street preachers on anonymous complaints, yet when Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, normalises a phrase that means ‘no more Jewish state’, they shield him behind secret legal advice they refuse to publish. This is two-tier policing in its most egregious form. I am certain that I am joined by the majority of British Citizens who are not Jewish, in standing for our Jewish community and demanding that they have equal protection under the law.”
Formal referrals have now been made to the IOPC for suspected misconduct and to the Information Commissioner for persistent breach of the Freedom of Information Act.




Comments