The initial reason for banning Israelis from Villa Park in November was the danger to Israeli away fans from “armed” Birmingham locals, not due to any risk believed to be posed by the Israeli fans, according to evidence revealed to the UK Home Affairs Select Committee.
The decision to ban was originally made after West Midlands Police received intelligence on September 5 that locals in the predominantly Muslim area wanted to “arm” themselves against Maccabi Tel Aviv supporters. Then, during a police planning meeting on September 22, it was discussed that “it is clear that there is a growing suggestion of local hostility toward the visitors based on their nationality.”
To justify the ban and in the absence of intelligence to support it, the police on October 8 portrayed the Israelis as “uniquely violent” and militaristic.
West Midlands Police used “intelligence,” supposedly from a meeting with Dutch police commanders, to support this. However, the Dutch police inspectorate wrote a letter in December that entirely contradicted claims made by West Midlands Police about Maccabi fans’ previous behavior.
During Tuesday’s Home Affairs Select Committee recall hearing, West Midlands Police confirmed no minutes were kept during the discussion with Dutch police. Furthermore, when asked why the intelligence about a potential armed threat to Israeli fans was kept secret and was only being reported now, the chief constable replied that he had not been asked for it.
“I think it’s the first time you’ve asked for that detail,” said Chief Constable Craig Guilford. Following this, several members of the committee could be heard saying “absolutely outrageous.”
Guilford then went on to say he still stands by the evidence he gave to the previous committee hearing in December regarding what happened in Amsterdam during the Ajax vs Maccabi game in 2024, despite subsequent contradictions by Dutch police and The Sunday Times.
“There was a lot of intelligence that people would actively seek out Maccabi fans and seek violence toward them,” Assistant Chief Constable Mike O’Hara said, adding, however, that there were also fears that the Maccabi fans would target the community. He therefore said that the police did what was needed to “protect the public” and stressed that there was no conspiracy.
Guilford added he didn’t think there was any “political interference” in the decision.
Despite reporting by The Jerusalem Post and other media that the police had consulted with several mosques that hosted antisemitic preachers prior to the ban, O’Hara told the committee, “We didn’t.” This is despite the fact that the list of mosques was provided by the police last month and that the links between the mosques and extremist figures are easily accessible.
Lapse in intelligence communication
Following the questioning of the three officers, three members of Birmingham City Council were brought to testify. The council’s leader went on to tell the committee that he had never been told of the police intelligence regarding potential harm to Israeli fans, saying he had been told it was because the Israelis were “uniquely violent.”
“I was not told anything about armed groups or anything of that nature [by WMP],” said Councillor John Cotton. “And if anybody had mentioned the prospect of armed groups, I obviously would have responded quite vociferously because something of that nature is clearly of massive concern that needs to be addressed.”
He added that the Safety Advisory Group was urged to consider a ban due to the possible risk to locals; however, he himself had said he thought that would send the wrong message.
Cotton said he now has massive concerns about the intelligence provided to the SAG, noting that the SAG can only work based on the confidence of the material put in front of it.
“This reflects poorly on Birmingham and is something I want to address,” he added.
A chief constable being recalled to a parliamentary committee is unprecedented, and it suggests that there was reason to believe the evidence provided the first time was not truthful.
It is also unprecedented that the chief constable was asked to provide more evidence for issues lacking clarity.