Four of Britain’s top lawyers make Ofcom complaint about BBC’s refusal to label Hamas ‘terrorists’ after Israel attacks – as they accuse corporation of abandoning its impartiality

Four of Britain’s top lawyers have complained to Ofcom about the BBC’s refusal to label Hamas as ‘terrorists’ after its attacks on Israel.

The corporation last night defended its decision not to describe Hamas militants as ‘terrorists’ in its coverage of the deadly attacks in Israel, despite receiving a major backlash from politicians and those within the Jewish community.

The broadcaster’s refusal continues despite King Charles condemning the ‘barbaric acts of terrorism’ while the Prince and Princess of Wales spoke of their distress following ‘Hamas’ terror attack’.

The BBC instead refers to Hamas as a ‘militant’ group and describes the massacre of civilians as a ‘militant’ attack.

Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis accused broadcasters of trying to ‘deliberately mislead’ by not using the word terrorists, while Defense Minister Grant Shapps called on the corporation to ‘get the moral compass out’ and Labor leader Keir Starmer urged the broadcaster to ‘clarify’ it. argument.

Lord Wolfson KC, Lord Pannick KC, Lord Grabiner KC and Jeremy Brier KC have now accused the BBC of failing to show impartiality ‘beyond doubt’ by describing Hamas in ‘more sympathetic terms’ as ‘militants’.

The four senior lawyers signed a letter calling on Ofcom to investigate. In a letter shared on X, they said: ‘On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a major invasion of the State of Israel that resulted in the slaughter, rape and kidnapping of over a thousand Israelis in various ways. citizens. There is nothing controversial about it. This is a fact.

“The BBC fell far below the standards expressed in its editorial values ​​in reporting that invasion and its aftermath.”

They added that Hamas being a banned terrorist organization in the UK is ‘not a matter of debate or discussion. It is a question of legal fact’.

The lawyers accused the BBC of ‘watering down’ the way Hamas is portrayed. They signed the letter together with Lord Polak, honorary president of the Conservative Friends of Israel.

The broadcaster justified its use of language in the name of impartiality, adding that its job was to explain ‘exactly what is happening on the ground so that audiences can make their own judgement’.

The BBC’s director of editorial policy, David Jordan, said the use of the word terrorist was a “very long-standing policy” that had “stood the test of time”. He added: ‘We’ve called them massacres, we’ve called (them) murders, we’ve called them out for what they are and that in no way devalues ​​the horror of what’s going on.’

The BBC spokesperson said: ‘We always take our language very seriously. Anyone who watches or listens to our coverage will hear the word ‘terrorist’ used many times – we attribute it to those who use it, for example the UK government.

‘This is an approach that has been used for decades, and is in line with that of other broadcasters.

‘The BBC is an editorially independent broadcaster whose job it is to explain exactly what is happening ‘on the ground’ so that our audiences can make up their own minds.’

BBC editorial guidelines say terrorism is an ’emotional subject with significant political overtones’ and ‘terrorists’ can be a ‘barrier rather than an aid to understanding’.

Nick Robinson, a presenter on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, said on social media: ‘I completely understand why some want to use the word ‘terrorism’. However, it is the long-standing practice of BBC, ITV and Sky to report others using that language rather than using it themselves.’

Culture Secretary Lucy Frazer raised the issue with BBC director-general Tim Davie, making clear her view that these were ‘terrorist acts carried out by a terrorist organisation’.

The Board of Deputies of British Jews said that by calling Hamas ‘militants’ the BBC ‘not only lends legitimacy to their government but also denies the fact that they are committing atrocities’.

Former BBC journalist Jon Sopel said the corporation’s editorial guidelines were ‘no longer fit for purpose’.

But the decision has seen a number of BBC stars rally around their employer, including the corporation’s veteran foreign correspondent John Simpson defending the coverage, claiming ‘to call someone a terrorist means you’re taking sides’.

Mr Simpson took to X, formerly known as Twitter, to defend his employer’s decision, claiming ‘British politicians know full well’ why it avoids the word terrorist.

He wrote: ‘British politicians know very well why the BBC avoids the word ‘terrorist’, and over the years many of them have privately agreed with it.

‘Calling someone a terrorist means you take sides and stop dealing with the situation with the necessary impartiality.

‘The BBC’s job is to put the facts before its audience and let them decide what they think, honestly and without talking.

‘That’s why, in Britain and around the world, almost half a billion people watch, listen and read us. There is always someone who wants us to make noise. Sorry, that’s not what we do.’

MailOnline has contacted the BBC for further comment.