Met police chief praises 'professional' conduct of officer in antisemitism row

"The wider actions and intent of the officer were professional and in the best tradition of British police trying to prevent disorder."

The commissioner said the officer feared there was a danger of violence or disorder if Falter and those with him came into direct contact with the Palestinian marchers, and thus was correct to stop the antisemitism campaigner.

Rowley said: "The public would be horrified if we said: well, it's obvious if those two groups come together, there's going to be a massive fight. We'll stand back and wait till it happens and we'll pick up the pieces afterwards."

Rowley said the officer would not be sanctioned and would be allowed to police protests again. The crisis worsened for the Met after a statement from an assistant commissioner, Matt Twist, had to be withdrawn after the force was accused of victim-blaming by Falter and his supporters.

Rowley described as illogical claims it was too dangerous for Jewish people to walk the streets when pro-Palestinian marches were taking place.

He dismissed much of the criticism faced by the Met over the handling of protests as ill-informed and said no one - by implication in government - had pointed to laws they could use more vigorously.

Rishi Sunak said he was "appalled" by Falter's treatment and on Monday, asked if Rowley had his backing, said: "I do have confidence in him, but that's on the basis that he works to rebuild the confidence and trust of not just the Jewish community, but the wider public."

Rowley, who manifestly is less than impressed with politicians' comments on the protest issues, said: "The prime minister can choose his own words."

Falter and others say the officer's actions prove their point that areas around pro-Palestinian marches are not safe for Jewish people. The commissioner hit back, saying "it's not a logical view" and that those supporting the Palestinian cause had been stopped from entering Jewish areas.

He added: "We've had intelligence about pro-Palestinian supporters wanting to drive vehicle convoys, waving flags, through Jewish areas in north London.

"Now, there's nothing illegal about them doing that.

There's nothing that's not peaceful about those Jewish communities. But it's clearly likely to spark some sort of conflict and we prevented them doing it.

"It is the opposite of what we were preventing Gideon Falter and his friends doing the other day."

Rowley criticised activists who he believed were going to protests to entrap officers by taking a photo or video which then is placed out of context on social media, triggering a storm of criticism. This has often then been bolstered by politicians on the right.

The Met commissioner stressed he was not talking about the latest incident with Falter. He said: "I'm not going to answer that in relation to the Gideon Falter incident … just to be crystal clear.

"But there are very clearly some situations where officers are being set up with an absolute intention to intimidate officers and create a sort of fakery to try and prove police are not operating neutrally without fear or favour."

The most glaring example for Rowley was an Asian officer who had a pro-Palestinian sticker glued on his arm for a short time, which was photographed. That photo was then placed on social media.

Rowley said the officer and his wife had faced death threats. "What's disappointing is that credible and significant commentators leap on top of that and magnify it, while we're doing factchecking," he added.

A government source said the home secretary wanted reassurance that the Met was using the protest laws to full effect.

Rowley said his force was "using the law to its full extent, to achieve the aims of peaceful protest and protecting the impact on others".

He added: "We don't allow protest; protest happens. There are very, very, very narrow sets of circumstances where we can make an argument to ban it and then that's signed off by the home secretary. You have to fear serious disorder. And we're nowhere near that.

"We've used conditions more often on these protests than ever before in terms of their duration, their start time, their end time.

"The wider principle on 'should the law be more restrictive of protest?' That's not for policing to decide, that's for parliament to decide on. We're never going to say parliament should be more or less permissive on protest. That's for them to work out."

Asked about politicians joining in criticism that the Met is too soft on protesters, Rowley said: "There's too many commentators cavalier with the facts and the law in suggesting that we should be doing X, Y, Z, where there's no basis to that whatsoever."

Falter told ITV's Good Morning Britain: "It's not, for me, about these frontline officers. It's about the decisions that have been made for six months now by Sir Mark Rowley, who has failed abjectly to stand up for Jewish Londoners and he seems to have thrown our rights, he's curtailed our rights and our ability to walk around the street, in favour of letting these huge groups of protesters do what they want to do."

The Met won support from a sometime critic of the force, Dal Babu, a former chief superintendent who said the initial account put out by Falter's group showed only a partial picture.

Away from policing, the Board of Deputies of British Jews said Britain's biggest education union, the National Education Union, had become "a hostile environment" for Jewish people, especially since the Hamas attacks of 7 October.

In the aftermath of the 7 October attacks, Rowley ordered "tens of thousands of extra visits and patrols around synagogues and mosques" to reassure people they were safe. He believes that is evidence of the Met's commitment to keeping Jews and other groups safe from a growing climate of hate.

Before becoming commissioner he was the head of counter-terrorism and co-authored a report calling for tougher laws on extremism to protect groups including Jews, which the government has not acted on.