A new report published by the London-based School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) on the 2022 inter-communal violence in Leicester is nothing but a propaganda document that unfairly blames Hindus and Hindutva while downplaying Islamist aggression.
The report, titled ‘Better Together: Understanding the 2022 Violence in Leicester,’ was released on 23 February 2026 and funded by the Open Society Foundations (OSF), an organization founded by ‘philanthropist’ George Soros. The ‘inquiry’ presents a distorted narrative of the events that erupted in the city in August and September 2022.
While the report claims that “no single community or group is ‘to blame’,” its findings consistently frame Hindus, the Hindutva ideology, and the Indian government as the primary drivers of the conflict. This portrays Muslim violence as reactive while depicting Hindu actions as the main instigators.
A Distorted Narrative
The report seems to frame the May 2022 altercation involving Hindu youths as the “main trigger” for the larger-scale violence that followed months later. It also characterizes the behavior of Hindu youths from the Daman and Diu community, including gatherings outside mosques and car convoys on India’s Independence Day, as “provocative” and a key factor in offending and instigating Muslims.
The document suggests that while both “Hindu nationalist and political Islamist actors” inflamed divisions, Hindutva was the more significant and international problem. The report states that “Hindu nationalism (Hindutva) was a clear factor” in the events and describes it as a “state-backed international project,” whereas the Islamist narrative is portrayed as more localized.
Villainization of the Daman and Diu Community and Hindu Symbols
The SOAS inquiry dedicates significant space to portraying the Hindu community from Daman and Diu as central actors in the unrest. It notes that they were blamed for antisocial behaviour, unregulated religious celebrations, a culture of drinking, and harassment and provocations outside mosques, a framing that adopts the accusers’ perspective without sufficient scrutiny.
Furthermore, the report casts common patriotic and religious expressions in a negative light. Raising slogans such as ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ during celebrations of an India-Pakistan cricket victory is described in the document as carrying “Hindu nationalist” sentiment and potentially offending Muslims.
Now contrast this with the report’s softer treatment of the Islamic slogan ‘Allahu Akbar,’ which was also raised during the violence.
Selective Use of Evidence and Omissions
A key point is the report’s selective use of evidence and its failure to name known instigators. While the report discusses social media disinformation, it does not specifically name individuals like Majid Freeman, a Muslim activist who was jailed in September 2024 for inciting terrorism and spreading lies about the 2022 unrest, including false claims of Quran desecration. It also omits detailed mention of inflammatory online content from figures like Mohammed Hijab.
The report does mention the attack on the Shivalaya Mandir, where a saffron flag was pulled down and burnt. However, it frames the incident primarily as something that “energised” the political “Hindus under attack” narrative for Hindutva groups, rather than as an unprovoked attack on a place of worship. It also includes a claim, based on an eyewitness, that Muslim counter-protestors formed a human chain to protect the temple, a narrative that is nothing but a trope used to deflect from Islamist violence.
Contrast with Previous Findings and Legal Judgments
The SOAS report stands in stark contrast to a November 2022 report by the Henry Jackson Society (HJS), which found no evidence of Hindu extremism in Leicester and concluded that the riots were instigated by Islamist misinformation.
Most significantly, take a look at the August 2025 ruling by the High Court of Justice in England during a defamation case involving instigator Mohammed Hijab. The court stated that Hijab’s account attributing responsibility to Hindutva “does not withstand scrutiny,” noting he had no first-hand knowledge of the events. The court also dismissed the idea that the ‘Jai Shree Ram’ chant was a definitive indicator of Hindutva ideology as opposed to non-political Hindu expression.
Panel Members and Funding Under Scrutiny
The composition of the SOAS inquiry panel is also problematic. Take note of the past statements and associations of its members to understand the pre-existing bias. The panel head, Juan E. Méndez, a former UN Special Rapporteur, previously called for UN intervention in India to “protect Indian minorities” in an interview with Al Jazeera but has not made similar appeals for Hindus in Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Another panellist, Schona Jolly KC, is reported to be a supporter of Kashmiri separatism.
Subir Sinha has previously equated Hindutva with Nazism.
Chetan Bhatt has written articles blaming Hindus for the Leicester violence and equating the RSS with Islamist groups.
Suresh Grover of The Monitoring Group (TMG), in an interview with convicted Leicester violence instigator Majid Freeman, blamed Hindus and the RSS for the unrest.
The Open Society Foundations (OSF) is said to have provided significant funding for the report. Records show a grant of $730,754 in 2023 to SOAS to “support the creation and work of a commission of inquiry into intercommunal violence in the UK.”
A separate 2022 grant of nearly $1.44 million was given to support fellows working on democracy and human rights in the South Asian diaspora.
It is noteworthy that OSF has been funding groups that destabilize non-left governments.
Recommendations and Reaction
The report’s key recommendations have further fueled the controversy. It specifically calls for the UK government to show “determined attention to recognising radical and militant Hindutva… as a form of ‘extremism’, like militant political Islamism and far-right white nationalism.” This is a false equivalence because British Hindus have never carried out terror attacks in the UK, unlike elements inspired by political Islamism.
The British Hindu community and various Hindu rights groups have condemned the report, viewing it as a biased document that resurrects narratives already debunked by courts and evidence. They allege it is part of a broader pattern of “Islamo-leftist” propaganda aimed at smearing Hindus and Hindutva, while platforms like The Wire have been accused of amplifying its findings as universal truth.
Source: OpIndia
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
