UK Police to End Non-Crime Hate Incidents

Published: 23 December 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

UK police leaders are preparing a major reform that could end the practice of recording non-crime hate incidents. The proposal, set to be presented to the home secretary, argues the existing system is outdated and often misapplied, drawing law enforcement into disputes that do not meet criminal thresholds. According to reports, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and the College of Policing have conducted a review recommending a replacement framework described as a “commonsense” approach to intelligence gathering.

Non-crime hate incidents currently cover actions perceived to be motivated by prejudice or hostility, including those related to race, gender, or other protected characteristics, that fall short of constituting criminal offences. Critics have argued that this category has led to unnecessary investigations, public confusion, and the diversion of police resources from serious crimes.

The review follows earlier moves by the Metropolitan Police, which announced in October that it would no longer investigate non-crime hate incidents. This shift reflects growing concerns about proportionality and the appropriate role of policing in social media disputes. Cases such as the high-profile arrest of Father Ted creator Graham Linehan earlier this year have highlighted these issues. Linehan, detained at Heathrow for comments regarding transgender issues, ultimately faced no criminal charges, with the investigation downgraded to a non-crime hate incident.

Nick Herbert, chair of the College of Policing, explained to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the government is keen to ensure police resources are focused on serious crimes rather than trivial matters. He said, “The home secretary has already indicated that she wants to ensure that the police are focused on the right things and not on the trivial. It was quite clear that the whole regime needed looking at, that there was a perception that the police were being drawn into matters that they shouldn’t have been. I don’t think the police service wanted to be drawn into them. They don’t want to be policing tweets.”

Under the proposed reforms, non-crime hate incidents would no longer be logged on crime databases. Instead, incidents would be recorded as intelligence reports, guided by a checklist designed to ensure consistency while avoiding overreach. Police officers would thus retain the ability to monitor genuine threats without unnecessarily scrutinising harmless behaviour.

Andy Cooke, head of HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire and Rescue Services, has expressed strong support for the change, noting that intelligence could still be collected effectively without causing unnecessary public concern. “I’m a firm believer that non-crime hate incidents are no longer required and that intelligence can be gathered in a different way, which would cause less concern to the public and would make recording of such issues much easier for policing,” Cooke said earlier this year.

The review by NPCC and the College of Policing is expected to be formally submitted to home secretary Shabana Mahmood next month. It is anticipated that the home secretary will consider whether the recommended system can replace the current approach, which has been described as bureaucratically heavy and socially divisive.

Some advocates of the existing system argue that non-crime hate incident records provide a valuable early warning of community tensions and emerging threats. However, police leaders maintain that the current classification often exaggerates minor incidents and erodes public trust. By refocusing efforts on serious antisocial behaviour, the new approach aims to restore balance and clarity in policing practice.

The proposed reforms reflect a broader debate over free expression and the limits of police involvement in social media discourse. Critics of non-crime hate incident recording have highlighted how the policy has sometimes been applied to online comments and jokes that, while controversial, do not constitute criminal activity. This has raised questions about proportionality, civil liberties, and public confidence in law enforcement priorities.

Police leadership emphasises that intelligence-led monitoring under the new system would still allow officers to identify genuine patterns of harassment or escalation. Unlike the existing framework, which logs every reported incident as a potential crime, the revised approach seeks to separate intelligence-gathering from unnecessary criminalisation, ensuring resources are allocated efficiently.

This potential overhaul is being closely watched across the UK. Legal experts, human rights organisations, and advocacy groups will likely scrutinise the review to assess its implications for freedom of speech, social cohesion, and the balance between safety and individual rights. If implemented, the reforms could signal a significant shift in how law enforcement navigates the interface between public behaviour and policing responsibilities.

The debate also touches on wider societal concerns, including the impact of social media on community relations and the definition of harm. Policymakers face the challenge of balancing protection from genuine harassment with preserving ordinary public freedoms. By moving away from formal criminal records for non-crime incidents, the new proposals attempt to strike that balance, reducing unnecessary alarm while maintaining oversight of serious conduct.

As the government prepares to consider the review, discussions about public trust, accountability, and the proper scope of policing are expected to intensify. Should the home secretary adopt the recommendations, UK law enforcement may see a reorientation of priorities, focusing on tangible threats rather than perceived offences that do not meet legal criteria.

With public attention increasingly drawn to the role of police in moderating online speech, the outcome of this review could have lasting implications for freedom of expression and police-community relations in the UK. While some stakeholders will welcome the reduction of bureaucratic burdens, others may be concerned that potential risks to vulnerable groups could be under-recorded. The proposed intelligence-focused system is intended to balance these competing interests while ensuring officers remain focused on serious antisocial behaviour and credible threats.