BBC accused of violating own child protection guidelines in Gaza documentary
The documentary, which sheds light on the experiences of children in Gaza amid Israel's assault through the eyes of narrator Abdullah al-Yazuri, was abruptly removed from the BBC iPlayer, after a campaign centred on al-Yazuri's relationship to a minister in the enclave's Hamas-run government.
Abdullah's father Ayman al-Yazuri, who is a deputy minister of agriculture in Gaza, has been labelled by media and pundits as a "Hamas chief" while he is in fact a technocrat with a scientific rather than political background, who has previously worked for the UAE's education ministry and studied at British universities.
Speaking exclusively to Middle East Eye this week, Abdullah explained that he and his family have been the targets of online abuse, adding that the affair has caused him serious 'mental pressure' and made him fear for his safety.
'I did not agree to the risk of me being targeted in any way before the documentary was broadcast on the BBC. So [if] anything happens to me, the BBC is responsible for it," he said.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The boy also said the BBC had not reached out to him to apologise.
His interview with MEE about his experiences has sparked a debate on media ethics and the broadcaster's responsibility to protect children it works with.
"I posted about this concern shortly after BBC pulled this documentary," said Chris Doyle, chair of the Council for Arab-British Understanding, responding to Abdullah's video.
"BBC has a duty of care. The BBC used these children, aired their stories, but then ditched and dumped on them. Not one of the anti-Palestinian mob have expressed one iota of concern that I have seen."
I worked on a doc for @BBC and we went to GREAT lengths to protect the children we worked with per their policy below. Abdullah, the child in the Gaza doc, says he is facing online threats after the film was dropped — the BBC is responsible for his safety. They must rectify this. https://t.co/jHQm8BMQx3 pic.twitter.com/tb0XuNzmeY — Ahmed Eldin | احمد الدين (@ASE) March 6, 2025
"[The BBC] has completely failed in its duty of care," Artists for Palestine UK said. "It is playing politics with the lives of children traumatised by 17 months of genocidal violence."
Several journalists and social media users have highlighted Section 9 of the BBC's editorial guidelines concerning children and young people as contributors, which states that the BBC "must take due care over the physical and emotional welfare and the dignity of under-18s who take part or are otherwise involved in our editorial content, irrespective of any consent given by them or by a parent, guardian or other person acting in loco parentis. Their welfare must take priority over any editorial requirement".
The guidelines also emphasise that "protecting children and young people online is a shared responsibility for the BBC, parents/guardians, and the under-18 concerned".
This is what the BBC Editorial guidelines say about protecting children that it works with. Abdullah, the child in the Gaza doco, says that after the film was dropped he and his family received online threats. He says, the BBC is responsible for his welfare. He's right: https://t.co/t946KSKwv5 pic.twitter.com/PaEozxyW9u — Sangita Myska (@SangitaMyska) March 6, 2025
MEE reached out to the BBC to ask whether it had taken the steps outlined in the section, including guidelines that dictate that if a person under 18 is suspected to be at risk in the course of their work, 'the situation must be referred promptly to the divisional Working with Children Adviser or, for independent production companies, to the commissioning editor'.
Section 9 further states that "procedures, risk assessments and contingencies for the impact of participating on an individual's emotional and mental well-being and welfare may be appropriate in some circumstances".
A spokesperson said: "The BBC takes its duty of care responsibilities very seriously, particularly when working with children, and has frameworks in place to support these obligations" and directed MEE to its public statement on the documentary.
'Put a target on a 13-year-old'
Social media users accuse the BBC of exposing Abdullah to danger, and say the broadcaster has a responsibilty to ensure his safety.
"Abdullah says he's been targeted & the BBC hasn't reached out. As a former @BBCNews journalist I can tell you that child safeguarding is a key part of our training. To see none of it applied here is shocking & speaks to the dehumanisation of Palestinian children over months," a user wrote on X.
.@DanFriedman81 immediately deleted his post calling to bomb a Palestinian child and his family, then blocked me. What a coward. https://t.co/9P1MmuemPa pic.twitter.com/N9uXBQqwFR — Dan Cohen (@dancohen3000) March 5, 2025
Prominent British journalist Owen Jones described the BBC as having put "a target on the back of a 13 year old boy".
Others underlined the larger media context in which the film was removed, arguing that it appeared to be another example of media bias against Palestinians.
"Had the situation been reversed and an Israeli boy revealed to be the child of a junior minister in Netanyahu's government the BBC might have felt obliged to issue one of its 'corrections and clarifications' but it's highly unlikely the film would have been withdrawn and the - extremely vulnerable - production team humiliated in such a public manner," said journalist and film-maker Richard Sanders.
Former BBC journalist Sangita Myska said the makers of the documentary "did not meet editorial standards of transparency" but this was unlikely to have made "a material difference to the overall accuracy of the film".
"The BBC has apologised for the mistake, which was the right thing to do. Yet, the BBC's inconsistent application of editorial standards across its coverage (eg, over-scrutiny of some Palestinan sources vs under-scrutiny of some Israeli ones) means 'public trust' was dropping well before this controversy," she continued.
British-Israeli historian Avi Shlaim, an emeritus professor of international relations at Oxford, told MEE that the pulling of the film was 'only the latest example of the public broadcaster's regular capitulation to pressure from the pro-Israel lobby'.https://t.co/FTq3kLPiOR — Just Jews (@JustJewsUK) March 5, 2025
Tayab Ali, the director of the International Centre of Justice for Palestinians, wrote: "It terrifies those complicit in war crimes and genocide to see Palestinian children as not only human but eloquent. They would rather erase him, label him, dismiss him, silence him - than let the world hear his voice."
"Censorship won't hide the truth. Abdullah's story, and the suffering of Gaza's children, must be heard," he added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Etihad
an hour ago
- Al Etihad
European Trade Union Confederation calls for more decisive, principled action on Gaza
19 Aug 2025 22:57 BRUSSELS (WAM) The European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) has called for immediate sanctions, including the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement due to the catastrophic humanitarian situation in Gaza and the ongoing actions of the Israeli this context, the ETUC sent a letter to EU High Representative Kaja Kallas demanding more decisive and principled action by the EU on letter argues for the 'EU to use all tools available to bring about an immediate and lasting ceasefire, and to ensure full, unimpeded, and sustained access for humanitarian aid to the people of Gaza.'This would require the EU 'to act on its own assessment and findings of violations, and advance immediate sanctions, including the suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, considering Article 2 of the Agreement, which conditions cooperation on the respect for human rights and democratic principles' and 'end all trade and economic relations with Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.'The letter was signed by the General Secretaries of the ETUC, UNI Europa, EPSU, industriAll Europe, ETF, EUROCOP, EFFAT, EFBWW, ETUCE-CSEE and EFJ, representing 45 million workers across Europe.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
UAE anti-terror laws 'cover' for crackdown on peaceful dissent, report shows
The United Arab Emirates' landmark 2014 anti-terror law is being used as a tool of political control rather than a way to protect national security, a new report by Women Journalists Without Chains (WJWC) said. The non-governmental organisation was founded in 2005 by Yemeni Nobel Peace Prize laureate, Tawakkol Karman. In a 48-page report released last week, the findings point to vague legal provisions in the UAE that allow for what the authors have couched as dangerous prosecutorial overreach. Federal Law No. 7 of 2014 represents the UAE's most comprehensive legal instrument addressing terrorism-related offenses. It was created because of a confluence of regional instability and the UAE's own strategic recalibration. There was also the regional rise of the Islamic State, which added to the urgency of the law's development. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Reformists have also long said that the law was designed to halt the rise of a popular brand of political Islam in the early 2010s. But its criminalisation efforts under broad terms such as "offending the state" and "undermining national unity" raise significant human rights concerns, the report said. "Compounding this issue is the law's reference to individuals who 'threaten', 'aim', 'plan', or 'seek' to commit terrorist crimes - formulations so vague that they could encompass expressions of opinion, political advocacy or even the exercise of conscience," the authors said. As a result, Federal Law No. 7 has caused the suppression of civil society engagement and dissent, leading to the detention of journalists, lawyers and academics, and creating a chilling effect across the country, the report explained. Among the most notable cases are individuals who received a decade or longer prison sentences for being part of the so-called 'UAE 94': when 94 activists were prosecuted for allegedly plotting to overthrow the government in the wake of the Arab Spring in 2012-2013. UAE top court upholds life terms for 24 convicted in mass trial Read More » The detainees were largely affiliated with the political reform party al-Islah, whose approach was solely non-violent. But for some of the most high profile dissidents, serving their sentence was not enough - the UAE tried several of them again in 2022-2023 under the vague terms of the 2014 anti-terror law, and extended their sentences, the report showed. Many of the alleged activities in the case that became known as the 'UAE 84' in its second round pre-dated the anti-terror law itself, raising concerns about the retroactive application of criminal law. Human rights lawyer Mohammed al-Roken - after spending a decade in prison - is now serving a life sentence for opposing the act of citizenship revocation by the Emirati government, the report said. Activists Maryam al-Balushi and Amina al-Abdouli were sentenced to an additional three years in prison in 2021 for "publishing information that disturbs public order", after they shared audio recordings with United Nations Special Procedures, in which they described torture and abuse in UAE prisons. "The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found that both women were subjected to unfair trials and arbitrary detention. Their cases demonstrate how the law is used to silence prisoners who expose abuse, even while in custody," the report said. And even though they are now working in exile, Mohammed al-Zaabi and Hamad al-Shamsi, who remain advocates for the UAE's political prisoners, have been added to the country's terrorism blacklist. Recommendations But it's not just criticism of the UAE and its ruling family that has landed people in prison. The economist Nasser bin Ghaith has been arrested multiple times for his critical views of regional governments. In 2017 he was sentenced to a decade behind bars on charges including "offending the state" and "communicating with banned groups". Families of political prisoners often face harassment, travel bans and surveillance, and live in fear of acts of retaliation, the report also said. "These cases reflect the systematic use of counterterrorism legislation to dismantle civil society, criminalize peaceful expression and suppress legitimate dissent rather than targeting genuine threats," WJWC noted. Punishments in the UAE for perceived terror offenses also far exceed the international standard, it showed. "Arbitrary deprivation of liberty is prohibited; detention must be time-bound and subject to judicial oversight," the report said, adding that there must be "independent and transparent investigations into all torture allegations, holding perpetrators accountable". But the UAE allows for indefinite detention in "counseling centres" even after a prison sentence is served, without a clear path to contest continued detention. There are also no independent authorities to investigate torture complaints, which are widespread, the report indicated. "The UAE's continued failure to ratify key international treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and its non-compliance with obligations under instruments it has ratified - such as the Convention Against Torture - highlight a profound gap between international human rights commitments and domestic legal practice," the authors wrote. The WJWC also issued a call to "international actors - including UN bodies, human rights organisations and the UAE's Western allies - to exert meaningful diplomatic and policy pressure to encourage reforms". The report argued that because the UAE presents itself as a key global counterterrorism partner, it legitimises its policies to governments abroad, when it is only further asserting authoritarian control. The WJWC urged immediate changes toward detailing the language in the anti-terror law, ensuring transparency in independent judicial proceedings and allowing public access to trials. It called for the repeal of provisions allowing for indefinite detention, and a "guarantee" that any "rehabilitation" programmes are in fact voluntary. The UAE must also assume full engagement with UN human rights bodies and allow for country visits for compliance assessments, the WJWC argued.
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Exclusive: Powerful Libyan official in talks with Israel to resettle Palestinians from Gaza
A senior official in Libya's internationally recognised government has held talks with Israeli officials over a proposal to resettle hundreds of thousands of Palestinians expelled from Gaza, multiple sources have told Middle East Eye. Speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the issue, Libyan, Arab and European officials told MEE that National Security Adviser Ibrahim Dbeibah, a relative of Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, was spearheading the talks despite Palestinians in Gaza flatly rejecting US President Donald Trump's postwar plan for the enclave. One Libyan source said that "practical talks" had already taken place but the specifics were vague. "The mechanisms and implementation have not yet been spoken about," the source said. Another Libyan source said that discussions were still ongoing and that members of the Tripoli-based parliament were deliberately being kept in the dark as pro-Palestine sentiment runs deep in the country. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The source said that in an attempt to placate some Libyan leaders, the US was prepared to confer economic support or other benefits in exchange for the country taking in Palestinians. The source said that Ibrahim Dbeibah had already received guarantees that the US Department of Treasury would release some $30bn in frozen state assets. In May, separate sources had told MEE that Massad Boulos, an adviser to Trump and father-in-law to his daughter Tiffany, had held discussions with Ibrahim Dbeibah about unlocking billions of dollars in sanctioned frozen wealth funds. The assets were frozen in early 2011 by former US President Barack Obama, several months before the Nato-backed ouster of longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi. Boulos flatly denied that he was involved in talks over the resettlement of Palestinians, telling MEE that the reports were "inflammatory and totally false". However, White House Deputy Press Secretary Anna Kelly said that Trump had "long advocated for creative solutions to improve the lives of Palestinians, including allowing them to resettle in a new, beautiful location while Gaza rebuilds". Seeking legitimacy from the US The idea of Libya serving as a possible new home for expelled Palestinians comes amid reports that Khalifa Haftar, a powerful military leader who also oversees a rival rubber-stamp parliament in the country's east, was offered greater control over the country's oil resources if he agreed to resettle hundreds of thousands of Palestinians. Haftar, who has played a seminal role in the widespread destruction and instability in Libya, as well as the ensuing civil war in neighbouring Sudan, has denied the reports. Meanwhile on Monday, hours after receiving a request for comment from MEE on the issue of resettling Palestinians, Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah said that his government would not engage in the "crime" of resettling Palestinians. The Gaza playbook: Israel's five-step ethnic cleansing strategy Read More » He reiterated a line from a statement by the US embassy in Tripoli in May which dismissed reports that Washington was pursuing a relocation plan for Palestinians in Libya. Israel has publicly mulled expelling Palestinians from Gaza and last week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli officials were in contact with "several countries" about absorbing displaced civilians from the war-torn territory. "I think this is the most natural thing," Netanyahu said. "All those who are concerned for the Palestinians and say they want to help the Palestinians should open their doors to them. What are you preaching to us for? We're not pushing them out - we're enabling them to leave… first of all, [leaving] combat zones, and also the Strip itself, if they want to." Recently, Israel's Agriculture Minister, Avi Dichter, singled out Libya as "the ideal destination" for Palestinians saying they would "happily leave" Gaza if the necessary international support was provided. "Libya is a huge country, with vast areas and a coastline similar to Gaza's," he said. "If the world invests billions to rehabilitate Gazans there, the host country will also benefit economically." Israeli officials have long advocated expelling Palestinians from Gaza and within a week of the 7 October attacks, Israel's intelligence minister at the time, Gila Gamliel, presented the cabinet with her "voluntary migration plan" where she hoped 1.7 million Palestinians would leave the enclave. Forced displacement, as observed in Gaza, violates international humanitarian law, notably Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the forcible transfer of protected persons by an occupying power. The European source told MEE that Dbeibeh and Haftar were "simultaneously negotiating with the Israelis" in the hope of getting "more legitimacy from the Americans". The source said that if the resettlement plan was forcibly imposed on Libya, Palestinians would find themselves moving out of the frying pan and into the fire. "It will be catastrophic at multiple levels," the source said. "Firstly, for the Palestinians themselves, who would have just about made it out of the Strip alive and escaped an obliterated life in Gaza, facing forced expulsion to a country like Libya which is in deeply complicated political turmoil with divided governments, where systems and society is broken by its civil war." "The Palestinians will not be getting any care from those governments, which will push them to the following catastrophe, [which] will lead to a new wave of migration towards the shores of Europe. And this is also a scary thought, firstly because the past decades have proven to us that many of them will only make it halfway through the Mediterranean, like many of those boats that capsized. And those that would eventually get to Europe, I do not think that Europe would be welcoming of another one million Arabs arriving at its shores, as the Syrians who just made similar journeys just few years ago." The Arab official, who was intimately aware of the latest talks, warned that complicity in Israel's ethnic cleansing plan could provoke widespread anger across all of Libya. "This will be a shock to the Libyan people," he said. Mohamed Mahfouz, a Libyan political analyst, echoed his remarks, telling MEE that the US was acutely aware that discussions around Libya resettling Palestinians could cause great distress for Libyan authorities. "Accepting Palestinians could come at a high price for any of the parties that will engage with the United States on this matter. This in itself may explain why neither [Libyan] government is yet to normalise relations." Outreach to Africa In recent weeks Israeli officials have publicly said, then later denied, reaching out to leaders from across Africa and Asia to use their territories as potential destinations for expelling Palestinians. Plans have been mooted for Palestinians to be resettled in Sudan, South Sudan and the breakaway region of Somalia known as Somaliland, despite all of the territories being plagued by violence. Sudan has been gripped by intense violence since its civil war broke out in 2023, with an estimated 150,000 people killed in the past two years. South Sudan has struggled to recover from a civil war that broke out after independence, with more than seven million people facing food insecurity and at least 2.3 million children at risk of malnutrition. Meanwhile, Somaliland continues to face threats from the armed group al-Shabab over the region's memorandum of understanding with Ethiopia - one of the greatest enemies of the group. A Libyan political analyst, who requested anonymity due to fear of reprisal attacks by government-aligned militias, said that it was "unsurprising" that Ibrahim Dbeibah was leading the outreach efforts with Israel. "[Ibrahim] Dbeibah, like the Libyan government, is marked by self-interest. He is well aware of the benefits of ingratiating himself with the US and Trump." While Libya does not officially recognise Israel, the Tripoli-based government, known officially as the Government of National Unity (GNU), is known to have held several secret meetings with Israeli officials in recent years. In 2023, Najla al-Mangoush, then foreign minister under Dbeibah, secretly met Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen in Italy. The revelation sparked outrage in Libya, resulting in angry protests and her suspension. In a later interview with Al Jazeera Arabic, Mangoush claimed she had attended the meeting on direct orders from Abdul Hamid Dbeibah, and that it was coordinated between his government and Israel. Arabic Post later reported that Ibrahim Dbeibah had orchestrated the meeting, citing unnamed sources. Middle East Eye reached out to the prime minister's office and the GNU for comment but did not receive a response by time of publication.
