A Muslim Metropolitan Police officer has been dismissed without notice over anti-Israel social media posts, including some celebrating the deaths of Israeli soldiers.
A misconduct panel found that PC Mohammed Nizam posted social media content during Israel’s war on Gaza that it deemed “antisemitic” and amounted to gross misconduct.
PC Nizam admitted posting, reposting and liking a series of messages between September 2023 and July 2024, many of them expressing intense anger over Israel’s military campaign in Gaza and support for the Palestinian cause.
A Met Police misconduct hearing, held from July 6-8, found that his activity breached professional standards relating to discreditable conduct and equality and diversity. The panel subsequently ordered his dismissal.
The case involved a mixture of explicitly political and pro-Palestinian material, comments about Israeli soldiers, and several posts or likes which the panel considered antisemitic.
Among the material cited was a repost declaring the user “Proudly Anti-Israel,” criticism of Israel as an occupying and colonial power, and statements describing Palestinians as having a right to resist Israeli occupation.
Nizam also repeatedly expressed happiness at the deaths of Israeli soldiers and made prayers asking Allah to inflict death and suffering on members of the Israeli military.
Subscribe to our newsletter and stay updated on the latest news and updates from around the Muslim world!
In one post about the deaths of Israeli soldiers, Nizam wrote “Alhamdullilah” and referred to Palestinian children who had been killed. In another, he said he celebrated the deaths of Israeli troops by saying “takbeer.”
He described the October 7 attacks as an “act of resistance” and posted abusive comments directed at people expressing support for Israel.
He also admitted liking content referring to “Zionist-controlled mass media” and another comment accusing a Jewish commentator of using the Holocaust to justify Israel’s actions in Gaza.
The panel said Nizam accepted that some of the material he engaged with would be considered antisemitic under the Israel lobby-backed International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.
Admission of wrongdoing
He told the hearing that he was not antisemitic and expressed sympathy for Israeli victims of the October 7 attacks, while accepting that some of his online activity had been profoundly wrong.
Nizam told the panel that his mental health deteriorated following October 7 and that he became increasingly distressed and angry after seeing images of violence and children being killed in Gaza. He said the material he witnessed online had left him “incensed”.
But under cross-examination, Nizam acknowledged that some of the offending social media activity had occurred before he had seen the images which he said contributed to his deteriorating mental state.
The panel therefore concluded that his mental health explanation could not account for all of his conduct. Medical evidence was considered, but the panel gave it limited weight because records showed a referral for support in July 2025, after the period covered by the allegations.
Nizam nevertheless told the hearing that he had undergone considerable reflection since the investigation began.
He said he had started reading Jewish News, contacted the Jewish Police Association for guidance, attended an online seminar about antisemitism, visited a synagogue event commemorating the Holocaust and attended an exhibition relating to the October 7 attacks.
He deactivated the relevant social media accounts and told the panel he was ashamed of some of his previous comments.
The panel acknowledged his early admission of misconduct, cooperation with the investigation and evidence of remorse.
But it assessed both his culpability and the potential harm caused by his conduct as high, noting that the posts had been made publicly and over an extended period rather than representing a single lapse of judgement.
It also stressed that Nizam had authored a number of the messages himself rather than simply liking or reposting material written by others.
The panel said discriminatory social media activity by a serving officer risked undermining public confidence in the impartiality of the police, particularly among Jewish communities.
It considered imposing a final written warning but concluded that this would not adequately reflect the seriousness of the conduct.
The panel therefore ruled that Nizam’s behaviour amounted to gross misconduct and ordered his dismissal without notice.
Nizam has the right to appeal the decision to the Police Appeals Tribunal.
