Eddie Howe’s time at Newcastle United is over. After nearly five years in charge, the head coach has stepped down following discussions with the club’s hierarchy over the past 48 hours. The move, however, did not come out of nowhere. Howe had already begun contemplating a departure weeks earlier, even as he continued preparing the squad for their Premier League opener against Liverpool on August 23.

His exit lands just 25 days before that fixture. It also arrives at a moment when Newcastle are attempting to stabilise after a turbulent summer of major sales, shifting priorities and growing uncertainty around key players. Howe leaves with the club still to issue a formal statement, but the decision is his, not theirs. Newcastle wanted him to stay. He felt he had taken the project as far as he could.

Matthias Jaissle lined up

Newcastle are moving quickly. Matthias Jaissle, currently at Al Ahli, set to replace Howe. The club hope to appoint the 38‑year‑old German within 24 hours, allowing him to take charge of the upcoming pre‑season camp in La Manga. Jaissle’s current employers, Al Ahli, are one of four clubs owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund. This is the same ownership group behind Newcastle, which has helped accelerate discussions.

Kieran McKenna and Antonio Conte were also considered, but Newcastle have settled on Jaissle as the preferred candidate to take the squad forward.

Howe and a summer of doubts

Newcastle’s summer has already been defined by major outgoings. Sandro Tonali has joined Tottenham in a £100m deal. Anthony Gordon has moved to Barcelona for close to £70m. Captain Bruno Guimaraes wants to leave and is wanted by Arsenal. Last summer, Alexander Isak departed for Liverpool in a British‑record £125m transfer.

Those departures have shaped Howe’s thinking. He believed he could take Newcastle forward again this season, but only if the club recruited strongly. Instead, the squad has been stripped of several of its most influential players, leaving Howe concerned about what the team would look like by the start of the campaign.

Newcastle have made additions, with winger Bazoumana Toure from Hoffenheim for £42m, midfielder Sean Steur from Ajax for £23m, and goalkeeper Ewen Jaouen from Reims for £18.5m.  Yet they also missed out on Johan Manzambi, who chose Aston Villa. The balance of the squad remains in flux.

Howe’s final days

Howe’s final match was a 4‑1 pre‑season defeat to Bristol City on Wednesday night. The result did not trigger the decision, but it framed the timing. Upon returning from the game, Howe informed his coaching staff. He will now take a break from football. The players have not yet been told; they were given a day off and will fly to Spain for the training camp on Friday.

There is no acrimony. The club believe Howe has done an exceptional job. He simply feels the project has reached its natural limit under his leadership.

Howe’s reign: five years of progress

Howe’s tenure is one of the most significant in Newcastle’s modern history. Appointed in November 2021 to replace Steve Bruce, he inherited a team winless in its first 14 Premier League games. By May 2022, he had guided them to safety and an 11th‑place finish. The first team ever to stay up after failing to win any of their opening 14 matches.

In August 2022, he signed a new long‑term contract. By February 2023, he had taken Newcastle to their first final in 24 years, losing the Carabao Cup final 2‑0 to Manchester United. Three months later, he delivered a fourth‑place finish and Champions League qualification for the first time in more than two decades.

January 2024 brought an FA Cup Tyne‑Wear derby win.  Newcastle’s first victory over Sunderland in almost 13 years. In May 2024, they finished seventh, scoring 85 goals and posting their highest Premier League goal tally ever.

March 2025 delivered silverware: a 2‑1 win over Liverpool in the Carabao Cup final, ending a 56‑year wait for a major trophy. Two months later, Howe secured another Champions League qualification with a fifth‑place finish.

The 2025‑26 season brought challenges. Isak left for Liverpool on deadline day. Newcastle reached the Champions League knockout stages via the play‑offs but were beaten by Barcelona. They finished 12th in the league. Gordon left for Barcelona in May 2026. Tonali followed in July. Guimaraes expressed his desire to leave. The squad was shifting faster than Howe believed was sustainable.

July 2026, after months of reflection, Howe has stepped down.

Howe’s final words on Guimaraes

Before news of his departure broke, Howe addressed the uncertainty around Guimaraes. He refused to offer assurances over the midfielder’s future, noting that neither the club nor the player fully controlled the situation. He emphasised Guimaraes’ commitment and quality, but acknowledged that external forces were shaping the saga.

His comments were calm, measured and consistent with his approach throughout his tenure: clarity without theatrics.

There are fears Newcastle could slip into a relegation battle without Howe, pointing to the scale of player departures and the reliance on unproven replacements. Supporters have expressed shock, frustration and sadness. Some believe Howe was not backed sufficiently. Others feel the timing is difficult but accept the decision. Many simply thank him for the memories.

Howe’s legacy

Howe leaves as one of Newcastle’s greatest managers. He delivered Champions League football twice, ended a decades‑long trophy drought, rebuilt the club’s identity and raised standards across the squad. His work was defined by consistency, clarity and a refusal to indulge in noise.

Newcastle now enter a new phase. A new head coach is expected imminently. A reshaped squad awaits. The project continues, but the architect of its revival has stepped aside.

Howe departs with respect, appreciation and a legacy that will endure long beyond the turbulence of this summer.

Featured Image via The Independent

By Faz Ali

Source link

The Supreme Court has today granted Palestine Action co-founder Huda Ammori permission to challenge the government’s continued terrorism ban on the group.

Palestine Action was ‘proscribed’ in July 2025. The ban was overturned in February 2026 by the High Court, which found it unlawful. Shabana Mahmood – still home secretary despite a change of PM – was allowed to go to the Court of Appeals. The appeals court overturned the High Court’s decision in June 2026, ruling that Mahmood was better placed than legal experts to decide what is a justified infringement on UK human rights.

But today, 30 July 2026, the UK’s highest court has granted Ammori permission to appeal to it. The case will be held sometime in the last three months of this year.

Palestine Action mass arrests limbo

The UK state has arrested more than 3,500 people for peacefully protesting against the ban. Dozens more were arrested today, including clergy, after a further protest at Westminster Magistrates’ Court – photos and footage will follow.

Britain today: An elderly woman in a wheelchair is escorted away by the police and risks up to 14 years in prison for supporting terrorism since the Home Secretary proscribed a protest group in 2025.

Her crime? She said: "I support Palestine Action and I encourage you to join". pic.twitter.com/GbHR7Aotro

— Defend Our Juries (@DefendOurJuries) July 30, 2026

The appeal decision means their cases will remain in stasis. The Starmer-turned-Burnham war on UK rights to protect Israel faces a new challenge.

Featured image via the Canary

By Skwawkbox

Source link

FIFA president Gianni Infantino has unveiled a commercial project. It could become one of the biggest financial ventures in the organisation’s history.

The plan would partially privatise FIFA’s commercial operations, most notably the World Cup. For the first time, outside investors would be allowed to take a stake in these activities.

Below, Al-Kanari breaks down the key elements of the proposal, how it would work, its potential value, and why it has faced such strong opposition.

A new commercial company

At the centre of the proposal is the creation of a new independent company, FIFA Forward Enterprise. This company would take control of FIFA’s commercial assets.

Those assets would include all of FIFA’s major revenue streams, including the World Cup — the organisation’s biggest source of income. They also include broadcasting rights, sponsorship deals, advertising contracts, ticketing revenue, licensing rights and event operations.

The plan would see up to 20% of the company’s shares sold to outside investors, including investment funds and private companies. Meanwhile, FIFA would retain an 80% majority stake.

The proposed company has been valued at around $20bn, based on an assessment carried out with US bank J.P. Morgan.

Funding incentives for approval

To win support from member associations, Infantino has tied the proposal to a major funding package for FIFA’s 211 national associations. There are two possible outcomes depending on whether the plan is approved.

If approved, the $10bn package would see each national association receive $40m during the 2027–2030 cycle. Of this, $20m would be distributed directly through the Fast Forward programme. Additionally, another $20m would go towards development projects through FIFA’s Forward programme over four years.

The proposed funding would then increase in later cycles, rising to $22m for 2031 — 2034 and $24m for 2035 — 2038.

If the project is rejected, the $2.7bn package would not go ahead.

Instead, associations would receive only FIFA’s standard funding of $10m for the next cycle. This means they would miss out on roughly 75% of the additional money offered under the proposal.

Deadline and approval process

Infantino has set 19 September as the deadline for federations to decide whether to join the project. The decision affects access to the $40m funding package.

The proposal requires approval from more than half of FIFA’s member associations, as well as backing from the FIFA Council.

Infantino insists the plan would not change FIFA’s governance structure. He argues that sporting, technical and organisational decisions would remain entirely under FIFA’s control.

Opposition to FIFA

The proposal has triggered significant opposition, led by UEFA and joined by other continental federations and prominent figures across football.

Critics argue that the World Cup is a global sporting institution, not a commercial asset. Furthermore, they believe that allowing investment funds to take ownership stakes would fundamentally change the nature of the tournament. They fear commercial interests could begin to outweigh sporting priorities.

Opponents have also criticised the way the proposal was developed, arguing that it was created behind closed doors with financial institutions and without consultation with the six continental federations. These include UEFA and CONCACAF, or the clubs and organisations responsible for running competitions.

They have also accused FIFA of using funding as leverage, arguing that tying additional money to a 19 September deadline places pressure on federations. This is especially true for those with fewer resources — to approve the plan.

Critics say the financial incentives amount to an attempt to push the proposal through by exploiting the funding needs of poorer federations.

Featured image via the Canary

By Alaa Shamali

Source link

The National have linked a Reform councillor who spoke at a ‘Nazi rally’ to a far-right vigilante group. And she’s not even the only one linked to these awful groups:

NEW: Reform councillor Audrey Dempsey, who shared a stage with neo-Nazis this weekend in Glasgow, has actually been "advising" a far-right vigilante street patrol group in the city

The National can reveal that she has been guiding the group on going to the "next level" pic.twitter.com/lmRB6xtrp8

— Laura Webster (@LauraEWebsterr) July 29, 2026

Advertisement

Nazis

We should note that Reform politicians have disputed that the ‘Nazi rally’ was in fact a Nazi rally. As Grace wrote for the Canary:

On Saturday 25 July, a far-right ‘Unite the Clans’ rally saw masked, violent fascists attacking people of colour on the streets of Glasgow. However, Reform MSP Thomas Kerr has since taken to social media to complain about the racist thugs being called Nazis — because obviously that’s the most important issue at hand.

The reason we’re confident calling it such is because many attendees were happily throwing off Nazi salutes:

Multiple Nazi salutes at the ‘Unite the Clans’ racist & fascist rally in Glasgow yesterday. They deny they are racist as majority of society abhors it. They masquerade as ‘protectors of women’, but only use concerns over women’s safety to scapegoat& build their fascist movement. pic.twitter.com/mUhNHLWP30

— Stand Up to Racism – Scotland (@SUTRScotland) July 26, 2026

Given the above, it’s no wonder an MSP has called for the group to be proscribed:

BREAKING: Anti-migrant groups causing terror in Scotland should be proscribed, an MSP has told the Home Office

Maggie Chapman has called on the UK to ban groups like Unite the Clans pic.twitter.com/p3PHBAYiJL

— The National (@ScotNational) July 28, 2026

Nazism is a well-understood and documented ideology with clear goals and methods. Clearly, any individual or group who promotes Nazi ideology is a threat to society. And as the philosopher Karl Popper wrote on the ‘paradox of tolerance‘:

If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

Back to the rally, Grace reported:

Reform councillor Audrey Dempsey is the elected representative of Springburn and Robroyston ward. She was also a speaker at the rally, pictured above in front of a sign for neo-Nazi group Patriotic Alternative.

Reform has not taken any action against her. And now we know that things are even worse than we thought.

Reform: The new Blackshirts

We now know that Demsey has also advised a vigilante street movement called Scots Active. The group is known for targeting migrants, as reported by the National:

Founded by Darren Docherty, Scots Active undertakes masked street patrols under the guise of protecting the local community, and frequently attends anti-immigration protests in Glasgow.

In a Facebook post thanking Dempsey for joining them on a street patrol, the group said:

We are so thankful she could take the time to come and complete a full walk. As well as all the advice and much more we need to take ourselves to the next level this year.

With counsellor Dempseys (sic) advice we are confident that we will make the right moves to becoming a non profit charity, have an official number for anyone needing our help to contact us on and we will hopefully have enough funding to get us set up in a small office space so the team have a base.

The National reached out to Scots Active for comment, with the group posting the following to their Facebook page shortly after:

You fucking stupid mate your gonny spread the lies you clearly listen to anyways fs take yer rag paper n shove it up yer hole.

Tiring

While Reform councillors are attending Nazi rallies and supporting violent street movements, senior Reform politicians are complaining that people are calling them ‘far right’ online. Frankly, it’s a ridiculous state of affairs, and it’s one that the public seem to be wising up to.

Labour has obliterated Reform’s poll lead

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link

On June 28th, unelected Prime Minister Andy Burnham appointed Bridget Phillipson as the new Labour Party chair. What many in the mainstream media did not report, however, is Phillipson’s connection to Stuart Roden, a lobbyist with links to Israeli intelligence.

Stuart Roden

In 2023, Phillipson registered two £40,000 donations from Roden, the co-founder of Hetz Ventures, a Tel Aviv-based venture capital firm he set up with London-born former Israeli intelligence officer Judah Taub. According to a Declassified UK report, Roden’s Hetz firm employs:

an array of former Israeli soldiers, many of whom have served in elite intelligence units.

Last year, leaked diaries revealed that Roden had been conducting private meetings with then Israeli ambassador Tzipi Hotolevy, and Phillipson is not the only recent Burnham appointment he has bankrolled.

Lisa Nandy

Labour MP Lisa Nandy, who also held “secret” meetings with Israeli ambassador Hotolevy, received a £40,000 in-kind donation from Roden in 2024, as well as a policy adviser paid for by serial pro-Israeli financier Trevor Chinn the year before. Now, she is Burnham’s Culture Secretary.

After a Freedom of Information request into Nandy’s meeting with Hotolevy, the Labour government refused to provide further details. Instead, Nandy’s department said that they would prioritise:

protecting relations between the United Kingdom and Israel.

Luke Akehurst

For at least two years, Phillipson was benefitting from quarterly payments from Chinn, again for “staffing costs”. During her deputy leadership bid in 2025, she also received support from Labour First, a group run by ex-Israel lobbyist and now Labour MP Luke Akehurst.

Akehurst, who has also been funded by Roden, was quick to celebrate Burnham’s appointment of his “friend” Phillipson as party chair. Former Israeli embassy officer Shai Masot once described Akehurst as:

one of the best on the inside … of the [Labour] party.

ELNET UK

In 2023, lobby group ELNET UK paid for a member of Phillipson’s staff to visit occupied Palestine. Described in financial disclosures as a “study tour”, they were accompanied by Akehurst. A staffer for Burnham’s new Defence Secretary, Wes Streeting, also travelled with the group.

ELNET lists the Israeli Foreign Ministry as one of their “partners”. A 2024 trip organised by the lobby group was led by Jeffrey Epstein “pal” and disgraced ex-Labour peer Peter Mandelson. Mandelson described Burnham’s new chief of staff, James Purnell, as “one of my boys”.

Other donations

In October, Phillipson received £40,000 from megadonor David Sainsbury and £15,000 from his daughter, Francesca Perrin. Phillipson has also admitted to accepting £14,000 in donations from Waheed Alli, Keir Starmer’s largest personal donor, for “lobby journalist” events.

In 2022, Phillipson accepted £15,000 from ex-Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy. Earlier this year, Murphy’s Arden Strategies lobby firm was caught offering companies access to a VIP dinner with “top advisers” to Starmer and Rachel Reeves in exchange for £30,000.

In the run-up to the 2024 general election, Arden helped raise funds for more than 30 Labour Party candidates. Their clients include arms manufacturer Northrop Grumman, which supplies weapons components to the Israeli military.

In November, Phillipson stood for deputy leader of the Labour Party. She received another £10,000 for her campaign from Murphy, a former director of Labour Friends of Israel. In 2015, Murphy promised to:

support Israel long after my political career is over.

Coup complete

In October 2024, Phillipson posted a short update on her personal website titled:

Good to meet with Andy Burnham.

At the time, Starmer had only been Prime Minister for three months.

Now, just two years later, Burnham has ousted Starmer and Phillipson is Labour Party chair. The Burnham coup is complete.

Featured image via Manchester Evening News.

By Jody McIntyre

Source link

Quick recap on the scandal

More than 700 people running small local post offices received criminal convictions between 1999 and 2006. Faulty accounting software made it appear that money had gone missing from their branches.

The Horizon IT system developed by the Japanese technology giant Fujitsu caused this. The Post Office installed the software in the late 90s, but flaws in its programming showed up deficits in branch accounts.

Postal service executives, refusing to acknowledge problems with the software, forced their workers to repay the shortfalls. Some were imprisoned or left out of pocket, while others failed to find other jobs and even lost their homes. However, in December 2019 a High Court judge concluded that the system contained a number of “bugs, errors, and defects”.

The UK government announced in September 2023 that every postmaster convicted would receive a payout of hundreds of thousands of pounds. This was the bare minimum for the damage caused.

As of 2026, more than 600 postmasters have seen their convictions overturned, and over £320m has been paid out in compensation. However, the DWP has still to review its departmental role in some 100 convictions.

A viral petition and the CWU sum up the corrupt cronyism that ‘Mr Bates vs the Post Office’ reignited public awareness of

British police accused of fabricating evidence with AI

Burnham hands cruel ex-DWP Minister the keys to No. 10

DWP boss McFadden making vague pronouncements about ‘helping people into work’ again

Featured image via the Canary

By Cameron Baillie

Source link

The University of Swansea has U-turned on a 2023 commitment to cut careers and recruitment ties with fossil fuel companies, against the wishes of student and staff campaigners.

Following one of the hottest Junes on record, the university has removed pledges from its Ethical Careers Policy to:

not knowingly devise marketing campaigns advertising […] roles which contribute to the detrimental effects of the fossil fuels, mining, arms and tobacco industries [and to exclude oil, gas and tar sands companies from access to] careers fairs and employer events.

In removing these statements, the university is effectively now permitting fossil fuel companies to promote their work and advertise to students. This comes after Met Office estimations that over 2,700 excess heat-related deaths occurred in May and June. The ban on tobacco companies remains in place.

In 2023, Swansea became the seventh UK university to exclude the fossil fuel industry from its careers and recruitment activities, after an 18 month campaign by students and staff. They were campaigning as part of the nationwide Fossil Free Careers campaign, coordinated by student-led charity People & Planet.

Since then, more than 10 additional universities have committed to banning the fossil fuel industry from promoting jobs to students. The campaign has had endorsement from the National Union of Students (NUS) and the Universities and Colleges Union (UCU).

Josie Mizen, co-director of Climate Justice at People & Planet, said:

After months of deadly heatwaves, it is absolutely shameful that Swansea University has backslid on its commitment not to work with the industry most responsible for the climate crisis.

This decision tells students and staff loud and clear: that their futures, their communities and the planet they live on matter less than their university’s cosy relationship with an industry that puts profit ahead of people’s lives.

We urge Swansea University to reverse its decision, and we stand in full solidarity with students and staff who resist university complicity in climate breakdown.

Advertisement

Swansea is one of 35 universities who this month have joined the Defence Universities Alliance (DUA). This is a scheme to promote greater collaboration between academia, the Ministry of Defence, and the arms industry.

A key criterion listed in the DUA Charter is to “promote careers in Defence” and to:

allow and support the attendance of defence sector firms […] at careers events.

The dropping of arms and fossil fuel exclusions from Swansea’s Ethical Careers Policy came just days after the university was announced as a founding member of the DUA.

A staff member at Swansea University said:

As a staff member I am extremely disappointed that Swansea University has chosen to remove the clause from their ethical careers policy which excludes fossil fuels, mining, and arms careers from any marketing campaigns.

Considering Swansea prides itself on positively impacting the ‘health, wealth, culture, and well-being of a global society’ this feels like a step in the opposite direction.

I hope that the university will reconsider this decision as I believe it has an ability and responsibility to show moral leadership for its staff, students, and community.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

Four of the eleven unions officially affiliated with the Labour Party have announced that they will boycott the Labour Women’s Conference this year. Unison, Aslef, Usdaw, and the Musicians’ Union cited the party’s decision to ban trans women from attending the event.

The news follows Labour’s cancellation of the 2025 women’s conference after the Supreme Court’s ruling that ‘woman’ refers to sex-assigned-at-birth under the Equality Act 2010.

‘Compliance with the law’

In December, the party’s National Executive Committee (NEC) then took a vote to formally exclude trans women from proceedings at the women’s conference.

Note, particularly, that the trans ban at the conference doesn’t apply only to the creation of ‘all women shortlists’, where the Equality Act might be most clearly applicable. Labour have ruled that trans women won’t be allowed in the main conference hall itself, quite literally relegating trans women to the fringe.

A party spokesperson claimed that:

This reflects our commitment to addressing the under-representation of women in the Party and compliance with the law.

Violating ‘policy on trans inclusion’

However, the High Court has since ruled that the law doesn’t require even ‘single-sex’ spaces like bathrooms to exclude trans women. In this light, Labour’s argument that it must exclude trans people from even entering the conference hall seems laughable at best.

Conversely, if the party’s intention is to generate an artificially transphobic consensus from its women’s conference, the blanket ban becomes a lot more understandable.

In reaction to the discriminatory decision, the boycotting unions stated that their attendance would violate their policies of trans inclusion. A Unison spokesperson said:

The union’s decided against sending a delegation to Labour women’s conference this year.

This is because the party’s restrictions on access run counter to UNISON’s policy on trans equality.

Likewise, the Metro quoted a representative of shop worker’s union Usdaw explaining that:

 The union’s decided against sending a delegation to Labour women’s conference this year.

This is because the party has excluded trans women, which runs counter to Usdaw’s policy on trans equality.

The Musician’s union simply stated that it has a “long-standing policy of trans inclusion”.

‘No real justification’

Whilst a less actively transphobic Labour Party might be embarrassed by its union backers criticising its nakedly discriminatory policy, we’re long past that point. However, the unions are also some of Labour’s most significant financial backers, which gives their dissent more weight.

Unison is Labour’s second largest union donor, contributing nearly £26m to the party since 2010. Usdaw gave just over £23m in the same period, making it the fourth-largest donor.

Meanwhile, trans-positive organisations have also raised their voices against the Labour policy. Grassroots group Labour for Trans Rights stated that:

For decades, trans women members have had a home in Labour’s structures, and it’s not acceptable that they’re being so blatantly excluded.

The trade union movement – including the Labour-affiliated unions – have been incredible allies to the trans community.

Advertisement

Likewise, Trans+ Solidarity Alliance director Alexandra Parmar-Yee said:

Clearly, there’s no real justification for banning trans women from a conference; this is just one example of a broken legal framework for trans equality.

For trans people, access to everyday public life is becoming harder and less safe – while organisations like businesses, charities and the NHS are getting caught in the crossfire of endless legal cases.

Andy Burnham can fix this, putting this issue to bed with a fair and workable approach, but if he doesn’t act this will end up being Labour’s legacy on LGBTQ+ rights for generations to come.

Feature image via the Canary

By Grace

Source link

The Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD) has opened sanctioning proceedings against la Directa. This follows it publishing investigations into undercover police officers within social and pro-independence movements.

This was announced on Wednesday at a press conference at the Barcelona Press Association by the outlet, together with Irídia – Centre for the Defence of Human Rights and the Ramon Barnils Group of Journalists.

The action stems from a complaint filed by four of the police officers who, between 2020 and 2023, infiltrated social and political movements in Catalonia and the Valencian Country without judicial authorisation.

The complaints were initially dismissed, but the AEPD’s presidency subsequently reopened the case and has now launched the sanctioning proceedings.

La Directa claims public interest

La Directa maintains that its investigations exposing undercover police officers within social movements constitute a legitimate exercise of the right to communicate and receive truthful information (freedom of information), and reflect the essential democratic role of the media as watchdog of public authorities, particularly when investigating covert police operations that affect fundamental rights.

Through these investigations, la Directa exposed an operation run by the Spanish Police’s General Information Commissioner’s Office, which introduced at least four agents under false identities into social and pro-independence movements.

These cases have had major political, social and legal repercussions. Indeed, for the first time, the Spanish government acknowledged that these infiltrations into social movements were carried out under the police formula of the “intelligence agent”. This is a role that operates without judicial authorisation and has no recognition within the Spanish legal framework. This is a thesis it has reiterated in responses to parliamentary questions and before the United Nations Human Rights Committee.

Despite this, the AEPD’s ruling disregards it and refers to the officers as if they were undercover agents, a category that does have legal grounding and judicial oversight. It even treats the fictitious first and last names the officers used during the infiltration as personal data requiring protection.

The AEPD’s ruling accuses la Directa of disseminating “personal and professional information” about the infiltrated officers “that allows for their identification,” despite the fact that the outlet carried out a rigorous balancing exercise between the right to information and the protection of personal data: it partially concealed their faces and published only the initials of their real first and last names.

‘Gagging effect’ of ruling

Despite these precautions, the ruling also orders the removal of part of the published information and seriously undermines the investigation as a whole, as well as the right to the free exercise of journalism.

Sònia Olivella Saludes, strategic litigation coordinator at Irídia – Centre for the Defence of Human Rights, believes the proceedings:

generate a serious intimidating and gagging effect on investigative journalism.

The organisation, which filed the first criminal complaint against a state police infiltration operation targeting social movements, will submit objections against the proposed sanction and demand that the proceedings be dropped, on the grounds that la Directa struck an appropriate balance between the officers’ right to data protection and the right to information.

Olivella states that the outlet took the necessary precautions to prevent the officers’ direct identification. At the same time, she considers the published information essential to understanding the scope and significance of the infiltration operation. She says:

Spain infiltrated police officers into social movements, resulting in serious human rights violations. Not only has it denied the facts and obstructed victims’ access to justice, but now the outlet that exposed it is being criminalised.

Jesús Rodríguez, a journalist at la Directa, stresses that the public relevance of the information “is indisputable” and notes that uncovering the infiltrations led to the creation of a commission of inquiry in the Catalan Parliament and prompted numerous opposition initiatives and parliamentary questions in the Spanish Congress of Deputies.

In addition, the cases have been covered by Catalan, Spanish and international media outlets, including the Guardian and la Repubblica.

Comparison to the UK

The AEPD’s action stands in stark contrast to the response of public institutions in similar cases in the UK. After it was revealed that undercover officers had maintained intimate relationships with activists under false identities, and only thanks to sustained popular, political and media pressure from social movements, social organisations and news outlets, both the police forces and the UK government took responsibility, apologised to the victims and paid them compensation.

Moreover, in that case, the identities and photographs of the undercover officers were published freely by the media and remain publicly accessible, without this leading to any kind of sanction against the outlets that reported on the facts.

In the Spanish state, by contrast, cases of undercover policing continue to go without effective investigation or any clarification of accountability.

The threat of a financial penalty and the removal of content may discourage the media from publishing relevant information about the actions of public authorities. It therefore has an effect comparable to what are known as SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation), lawsuits designed to silence and censor.

La Directa case could set precedent

These proceedings could set a highly dangerous precedent for all media outlets and professionals who investigate police abuses or other matters uncomfortable for institutions. Elisabet Borreda, co-chair of the Ramon Barnils Group of Journalists says:

It is not la Directa that has violated personal data here, it is Spain, and we will not allow data protection to be used as a weapon against those who investigate it. When the same journalist or outlet accumulates multiple unfounded lawsuits and complaints, we are no longer talking about isolated cases: we are talking about a pattern of attrition, a clear case of SLAPP.

To face the proceedings, which threaten the viability of the journalistic cooperative, la Directa is launching a support campaign. A statement already backed by dozens of journalists and professional, social and human rights organisations, both domestic and international, states:

Defending la Directa means defending society’s right to know how public authorities act. We cannot allow those who investigate to be sanctioned while those who infiltrate are protected.

Among the first signatories are the various movements affected by police infiltration and organisations such as Òmnium Cultural, Alerta Solidària, the Journalists’ Union of Catalonia / Union of Communication Professionals (SPC) and Red Jurídica, along with dozens of media outlets and journalists.

Organisations from the UK, such as State Watch and the Police Spies Out of Lives movement, among others, are also calling for the sanctioning proceedings against la Directa to be dropped and for the Spanish government to introduce the legislative changes needed to ensure data protection rules cannot be used to gag and censor the media.

Rodríguez notes:

The AEPD’s sanction leads us to question the democratic quality of Spanish institutions. The names, surnames and photographs of officers who infiltrated social movements in the UK can be freely published by any media outlet, including la Directa, yet we are being ordered to censor all data relating to the undercover officers in the Spanish state, despite the undeniable news value of these cases.

Featured image via the Canary

By The Canary

Source link

On Wednesday 27 July, Reform UK leader Nigel Farage posted the following to Twitter/X:

This is what Zack Polanski has just posted on his instagram.

If I was to post anything as inciteful then I would expect to be arrested, and so should Polanski. pic.twitter.com/u1s25FQ38U

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) July 27, 2026

Advertisement

The image in question shows a guillotine next to the message “We’re only making plans for Nigel”. And Farage is certainly correct to think he would have attracted criticism if he’d published something similar.

Farage is less correct to suggest Polanski ‘posted’ the image, but we do agree the Greens leader was correct to apologise. We also agree with those who pointed out that some of the objections from Reform are a bit rich given the behaviour they tolerate from their own politicians.

We don’t condone this either

As the BBC reported, Reform UK has now reported Polanski to the police. The Met Police have issued the following statement:

We received a third-party report relating to an image shared on social media. We take reports of this nature extremely seriously, and officers are conducting enquiries into the matter.

To make something abundantly clear, we don’t condone the guillotine image, nor indeed any call for violence. While ordinary crime may be down compared to the end of the last century, acts of terror and political violence are becoming unfortunately common (not to mention acts of state violence which are perpetrated by the police and other agents of the government). Online culture no doubt feeds into this; as does the increased disparity people now experience. These issues need solving holistically if we’re going to get off the dark path we’re walking down.

Polanski and the Green Party have made their feelings clear too, with a spokesperson stating:

Zack condemns the image on the T-shirt. He was tagged in a post with 20 images and clicked accept without realising there was more to it than he had seen.

The T-shirt is clearly in poor taste, especially at a time of heightened fears for the security of public figures, having experienced multiple threats himself.

He and the Green Party call on everyone involved in public discourse to show kindness and not encourage more division.

Advertisement

Some people have described the t-shirt as ‘satirical’. The image pictured is obviously a reference to the French Revolution – the period when the downtrodden people of France rose up to execute the decadent aristocrats – and modern references to the ‘guillotine’ are a nod to the growing wealth disparity we’ve seen in recent decades (and to what many predict will be the inevitable outcome of this unchecked greed). There is a difference between vaguely memeing about guillotines online, though, and directly linking an execution device to a politician. And this is true even when the politician in question has said things like the following:

Welcome to freedom, Lucy Connolly.

You are now a symbol of Keir Starmer’s authoritarian, broken, two-tier Britain. https://t.co/pjsg9DLI7W

— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 21, 2025

Advertisement

For reference, Connolly tweeted this, which led to her eventual imprisonment:

Potentially, Farage and his allies will take this moment to reconsider the support they’ve given Connolly. That or they’ll drop their calls for the t-shirt man to face arrest. You’d assume it has to be one or the other, but we’ll see.

So Polanski accepts a collab on a picture and the world goes wild

Meanwhile, Farage literally inciting riots only a few months ago and posts shit like this

See the issue here? pic.twitter.com/DZgMacL98j

— Mr AntifaBot – AKA The Intolerant Left (@_Wrevolution_) July 28, 2026

“To be clear”

The offending image was posted by former Canary photographer and contributor Barold. Barold said the following in response to the controversy:

To be clear, [Zack Polanski] did not in any way post this photo. I took this photo of someone in a satirical tshirt and I posted it as part of a run of photos which were offered for collaboration. This wasn’t intended to offend anyone and it’s clearly not intended as a serious…

Threat to anyone’s safety whatsoever. The idea that people would be making serious threats or incitement to violence by using a picture of guillotine is absurd, and whilst I acknowledge the very real threat to MPs safety let’s be real here, the call for political violence…

Is not something that is being normalised by left wing political figures or individuals. Individuals from the far right of British politics have normalised the idea of political violence over the years – the last thing Jo Cox heard before her murder was “Britain First”….

There were numerous studies after her murder that showed how many people on the right were making jokes and memes about what happened. This performative outrage is just that, and if people want to come and take it out on someone then take it out on the person who took the…

Advertisement

Picture, and who then posted it. Don’t use the short sighted actions of a freelance Photojournalist called fucking Barold as an excuse to go after [Zack Polanski] because you don’t like his politics. Pretending that this is any sort of threat is insulting to the memory of people…

Like Jo Cox, and like Anne Widdicombe and the many many people every year who are victims of real crime, and real political violence every year. I personally have been run out of protest areas while doing my job by a mob of right wing fascists in the last few months…

During the protest at Edgeware recently I was physically threatened by individuals wearing transparent earpieces while doing my job. There is the real and genuine threat of political violence all around us, being heightened by the divisive and dangerous politics that are being…

Peddled by reactionary individuals who sit in TV studios and write in columns in the press every day – taking advantage of this issue is disingenuous and far more dangerous than that t-shirt will ever be.

Advertisement

My deepest apologies to [Zack Polanski] – this is not his fault.

Canary contributor Cameron Baillie posted a video showing a similar encounter to that which was described by Barold:

Here is a hired bruiser for Reform UK in Makerfield, who threatened me, a journalist and colleague of Barold.

He said to me off camera that things would “end very badly” for me if I continued to ask their MPs questions.

Advertisement

Thicko all but admitted he said it when I challenged him… https://t.co/C4vcmCby9U pic.twitter.com/YW0wlD7Hlw

— C.J.Mc. Baillie (@cjmbaillie) July 28, 2026

Wider response to Reform

Among those who responded to the controversy was Aaron Bastani of Novara, who said the following in response to Barold’s tweet:

Violence against politicians, and political figures, is an incredibly real prospect. From councillors and MPs to just activists. Amping that up in no way helps left wing politics.

I appreciate this is a joke, but the context means it’s not a laughing matter. A Reform figure was literally killed a few weeks ago.

Politically, though, Reform run risk of looking irrelevant. It’s week 2 of Burnham admin, and he’s really going for it.

Reform, meanwhile, are contesting a by election against a guy dressed as a bin, and calling for Zack Polanski to be arrested.

Reform politicians are directly calling for Polanski’s arrest too, including Zia Yusuf:

Zack Polanski has posted to his 713k Instagram followers a photo of a man in a T-shirt calling for the beheading of Nigel Farage.

To do this just 2 weeks after our friend Ann was murdered is staggering.

Polanski is inciting murder.

It must be treated as such by the police. pic.twitter.com/mkLvxESf21

Advertisement

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) July 27, 2026

If Zack Polanski is not in police custody by this time tomorrow, the Police will have declared open season on Members of Parliament.

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) July 27, 2026

Advertisement

As noted at the top, this is all very shaky ground for Reform. In the past few months alone, we’ve reported on the following in relation to Reform politicians:

• Farage threatens that white riots in Southampton are ‘just the beginning’.
• Reform councillor reposts that Labour MP ‘should be shot’.
• Reform candidate suggests ‘melting Nigerians’ to fill potholes.
• Calls for Reform candidate who praised rape of Sikh women to face suspension.
• Reform welcomes ‘shoot the p*kis’ scandal ex-Tory.

Of these, only one has been removed from the party:

• Nigel Farage remains the leader of Reform UK.
• Simon Evans – the Reform councillor who posted a meme calling for Labour MP Natalie Fleet to be shot – remains the deputy leader of Lancashire County Council.
• Glenn Gibbins – the man who joked about ‘melting Nigerians’ – remains a Reform councillor.
• Stuart Prior – the man who praised rapists – was expelled from the party.
• Derek Bullock – the man who called for Pakistani people to be shot – remains a Reform councillor.

We’re not highlighting this to justify the guillotine t-shirt; we’re highlighting it to note that Reform needs to get its own house in order. And as Canary writer Maddison Wheeldon said in response to a post about Simon Evans:

I get the point, but if we're going to attempt to legitimise this from the left by holding up the violent rhetoric of the far right, then only violence can ensue and the higher ground is lost entirely.

Violence is never funny – saying something is satirical doesnt make it okay https://t.co/kpSrEqMej5

Advertisement

— Maddison Wheeldon (@MaddisonW92) July 28, 2026

Reform need to get their own house in order

Incidents like this are best seen as opportunities for those involved to reflect and grow. For Zack Polanski and his team, it’s an opportunity to reflect on what they share on social media. For the t-shirt man, it’s an opportunity to ask if the message he’s broadcasting is being received as he expects. And for Reform UK, it’s an opportunity get their own house in order when it comes to violent and murderous rhetoric.

Featured image via the Canary

By Willem Moore

Source link