A ‘Bridge-Builder’ Vindicated: What Majid Freeman’s Acquittal Means for British Muslims
A verdict that changed everything
Last week Leicester Crown Court formally quashed the conviction of well-known community leader and activist Majid Freeman, clearing him of a Section 4 Public Order Offence stemming from the 2022 disturbances in Leicester instigated by Hindutva extremists. What had previously been presented as provocation was, after a fresh examination of the evidence, recognised by the court as something very different: leadership and bridge-building.
Allowing Freeman’s appeal, Judge Robert Brown concluded that the Crown had failed to prove intent to provoke violence. In his ruling, the judge praised Freeman’s character and conduct:
“As a witness he has impressed us. He was measured, restrained and showed humility when providing evidence. And it is apparent to us that he has been, on multiple occasions, a bridge-builder, working with the police, to ensure there was harmony in his community.”
Rather than viewing Freeman as an agitator, the court accepted that his actions on the night of the riots aligned with mediation and community protection — a sharp reversal from his 2024 conviction, which had carried a 22-week custodial sentence.
Local independent journalist Devon Winters, who sat through the entire hearing, described his reaction starkly:
“Seeing and hearing the evidence for myself, Majid’s innocence seemed obvious… there’s a big difference between the original guilty verdict and yesterday’s not-guilty decision with everything quashed.”
Former Leicester East MP Claudia Webbe also welcomed the ruling, saying:
“As a former MP for Leicester East (2019–2024), I regarded Majid Freeman as a trusted mediator, anti-knife crime campaigner, and community organiser doing good deeds who sought to bring harmony to communities.
I welcome his acquittal and was pleased to provide evidence in support.”
What the evidence showed
During the appeal, the court revisited video footage from the 2022 unrest, heard from multiple witnesses — including original police witnesses — and questioned Freeman in detail about his presence, actions, and intentions that night.
Key allegations that had supported his initial conviction — that he swore at officers, pushed them, or incited violence — were examined individually and ultimately found wanting.
Crucially, testimony from impartial witness Ajay Nagla, a local Hindu resident who was present during the riots, painted a very different picture. He recalled seeing Freeman actively trying to calm tensions and support the police amid a volatile situation fuelled by outside agitators. Nagla also described how he himself intervened when flags at a Hindu temple were set alight, only to face threats from individuals who had travelled into Leicester.
His statement reinforced a central point: the most constructive figures that night were often local community members — Muslims and Hindus alike — attempting to contain a crisis created by outsiders.
Why was Freeman arrested in the first place?
Alongside the legal reassessment, commentators have raised uncomfortable questions about why Freeman was targeted originally.
Some have suggested that his high public profile made him an easy individual for police to identify and arrest — precisely because he did not conceal his identity, unlike others who masked their faces that night. In other words, his openness and visibility may have been used against him.
Others have gone further, alleging that police leadership in the region may have had political motivations. Freeman had previously been vocal in criticising them, arguing that authorities failed to do enough to protect Leicester’s communities from Hindutva extremist mobilisation. To his supporters, his arrest looked less like neutral law enforcement and more like a punitive response to a prominent critic.
While these claims may be contested, Freeman’s acquittal has intensified debate about accountability, proportionality, and impartiality in policing during periods of communal tension.
Who is Majid Freeman?
Beyond this case, Freeman is widely known in Leicester as a community organiser and campaigner for justice. Claudia Webbe’s description of him as a “trusted mediator” reflects a reputation built over years of grassroots work — engaging with young people, supporting families affected by violence, and fostering dialogue between faith groups.
In his own statement following the verdict,[1] Freeman framed the ruling as more than a personal victory. He emphasised that the case was about truth, fairness, and the right of ordinary citizens to act with conscience in moments of crisis. He thanked those who supported him, highlighted the importance of standing firm without bitterness, and reiterated his commitment to protecting life and dignity wherever he sees it threatened.
What this means for Leicester and beyond
The 2022 unrest was not a spontaneous local conflict but was heavily influenced by external actors bringing Hindutva extremist ideology into a city long known for coexistence between Muslims and Hindus. Yet the testimonies in court showed that, at ground level, Muslims and Hindus in Leicester often stood side by side to protect one another.
Freeman’s acquittal therefore serves as both a cautionary tale about rushed judgments and a reminder of the quiet bridge-building that frequently goes unseen.
A further test ahead
Freeman is also currently awaiting trial on a separate charge related to his public expression of support for the Gazan resistance — an act that his supporters frame as principled solidarity with an oppressed people, and his critics depict as criminal. As the old saying goes, one person’s “terrorist” is often another person’s freedom-fighter.
Whatever one’s political view, this pending case underscores a broader reality: Freeman’s courage has repeatedly placed him in the crosshairs of controversy, not because he seeks conflict, but because he refuses to remain silent in the face of injustice.
We ask Allah to grant him ease in this trial as well, to make truth clear, and to continue to grant him and his family contentment with the decree of Allah. And we remember that, while courts in this world may falter or prevail, ultimate justice is provided by Allah alone in the Hereafter.
Reflections for the Muslim community
Standing firm with dignity
Freeman’s case illustrates that maintaining principle under pressure is not only about confrontation — often, it is about restraint, clarity, and composure. Muslims in Britain will at times face hostile narratives or false accusations; this verdict shows the importance of patience and perseverance upon the Haqq.
Justice may be delayed, not denied
The reversal of his conviction is a powerful example of how initial rulings can be flawed. There is an Islamic lesson here in steadfastness and dignified conduct, even when one feels wronged. As the well-known phrase reminds us, the arc of justice may be long — but it bends towards justice.
Bridge-building is an Islamic responsibility
Freeman’s actions — including reportedly helping to protect a Hindu man during the unrest — reflect the Qur’ānic injunction to act justly regardless whom it is for or against.
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm for Allah , witnesses in justice, and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just. Be just; that is nearer to righteousness. And fear Allah ; indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do.[2]
O you who have believed, be persistently standing firm in justice, witnesses for Allah, even if it be against yourselves or parents and relatives. Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both. So follow not [personal] inclination, lest you not be just. And if you distort [your testimony] or refuse [to give it]then indeed Allah is ever, with what you do, Acquainted.[3]
These āyāt point to an important phenomenon that the world is in desperate need of today: having a morality tethered to something outside one’s whims and desires, as explained in this video.[4]
Historically, Muslim societies have protected religious minorities and upheld communal coexistence. Freeman’s case shows what that legacy can look like in modern Britain.
Local unity over imported extremism
The testimony of local non-Muslims underlined that ordinary Muslims and Hindus in Leicester valued one another long before outside Hindutva extremists arrived. Muslims should continue to nurture those local bonds and resist narratives that frame communities as inherently opposed. Furthermore, in the spirit of being just, while we praise the zeal of young Muslims to stand up and defend themselves and their communities against Islamophobic thugs, we readily make denial of any evil or injustice committed by Muslims who allowed themselves to be provoked into reacting in a way unbefitting of Dīn of Allāh ﷻ.
Constructive engagement with authorities
The judge acknowledged police errors without condemning officers wholesale. Likewise, Muslims can — and should — be firm on their rights while still working alongside police to safeguard life, property, and public order. After all, the preservation of these things only helps the Dīn—and therefore justice and prosperty—spread.
A wider lesson
Majid Freeman’s acquittal is not simply a personal victory. It is a reminder that character, patience, and bridge-building matter — especially in moments of crisis. In an increasingly polarised climate, British Muslims have both an opportunity and a responsibility to model the kind of principled calm that this case ultimately recognised.
May Allah grant Majid Freeman ease, protect him from harm, and make him steadfast upon truth. And whatever the outcome of any future proceedings, may he find comfort in knowing that no one can truly harm him as long as he stands with his Lord and on the side of justice.
Ameen.
Source: Islam21c
Notes:
[1] https://www.cage.ngo/articles/majid-freeman-exonerated-following-politicised-hindutva-riots-conviction
[2] Al-Qur’an 5:8
[3] Al-Qur’an 4:135
[4] https://youtu.be/0qFASpwHOIM?si=tjjP55tJdSsPOVsR
