GnasherJew, CAA and UKLFI: a guide for employers

For employers, HR teams, managers and responsible officers. If you have been contacted about a member of your staff by the anonymous GnasherJew account, or have seen a complaint from Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) or UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), this page sets out what is publicly documented about these groups, what the law says, and the practical steps that protect your staff and your organisation. Every fact links to its source.

HAC does not say that every complaint these groups make is wrong. Antisemitism is real and must be dealt with properly. But a complaint is not a finding. Every complaint deserves the same fair, evidence-based process, whoever sends it.

1. What GnasherJew is

• Anonymous. GnasherJew does not publish the names of the people who run it. A 2021 report described it as “run by a group of four anonymous racism-hunters”. Its website terms say it processes personal data under UK data protection law, but name no data controller, address or email; enquiries go to a web form.
  Sources: The Jewish Chronicle, 13 May 2021; GnasherJew website terms; GnasherJew contact page.
• Its stated aim. In its own words: “We track down individuals, including professionals in positions of trust such as doctors, lawyers and teachers … By unmasking these accounts, we ensure their actions carry real-world consequences.”
  Source: GnasherJew, “Who we are”.
• Calls to complain to employers and regulators. Its pages about health workers publish details such as GMC numbers, employers and photographs, and urge readers to report them. It has a dedicated listing headed “Antisemitic healthcare professionals exposed”.
  Source: GnasherJew healthcare professionals listing (we do not link to pages about individuals).
• Hosted in Iceland. The website’s IP address (185.165.170.9) is registered to FlokiNET in Iceland. FlokiNET’s own acceptable use policy bans “Doxxing: revealing or sharing personal and private information without consent”.
  Sources: RIPE database record; FlokiNET acceptable use policy.
• Funded by donations. Its “Support our work” page embeds a Donorbox fundraiser, which takes card payments (processed by Stripe) and PayPal. Its articles say: “Your financial backing keeps this archive online”.
  Sources: GnasherJew, “Support our work”; Donorbox fundraiser page.
• Suspended from Twitter three times. By its own account, Twitter (now X) suspended it in February 2018 over a Star of David avatar and in April 2021, reinstating it both times, and again in March 2022. GnasherJew says it is “the target of a great deal of malicious reporting”.
  Sources: GnasherJew, 23 March 2022; The Jewish Chronicle, 26 February 2018.

2. Documented legal and regulatory findings

These are findings and decisions by courts and regulators, and complaints that regulators are still considering. Where a matter is undecided, we say so. A complaint is an allegation, not a finding.

Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA)

UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI)

What the regulators say about referrals

The General Medical Council has said: “We know doctors may feel worried about fitness to practise referrals to the GMC being used inappropriately to discourage comment or unfairly target individuals. We’re clear that this is absolutely unacceptable.” It added that it had been meeting employers “to outline our expectations for how they should support doctors facing such issues”, and that taking part in a protest “would not in itself constitute a fitness to practise concern”.
Source: GMC, 30 May 2024.

How often these groups name health workers

HAC’s Regulator and Employer Complaints Tracker records, from each group’s own published material and official decisions, the UK health workers that GnasherJew, CAA, UKLFI and others have named, reported, or urged the public to report. At its last update (27 October 2026) it listed 42 entries involving GnasherJew, 28 involving UKLFI and 21 involving CAA. In most cases no outcome has been published. Every entry links to its sources.

3. What the law says

Equality Act 2010

• Protected characteristics include race and religion or belief. “Belief” includes philosophical belief.
  s.9 (race); s.10 (religion or belief).
• The test for a philosophical belief is set out in Grainger plc v Nicholson: genuinely held; a belief, not an opinion; weighty and substantial; cogent, serious, cohesive and important; and worthy of respect in a democratic society. Forstater v CGD Europe confirmed that only the most extreme beliefs, akin to Nazism or totalitarianism, fail the last test.
  Grainger plc v Nicholson [2010] ICR 360 (EAT); Forstater v CGD Europe (EAT, 2021).
• Anti-Zionist belief can be protected. In Miller v University of Bristol (2024), an employment tribunal held that the claimant’s anti-Zionist beliefs “qualified as a philosophical belief and as a protected characteristic” and that his dismissal was direct discrimination. In 2026 the Employment Appeal Tribunal upheld the tribunal’s findings on liability.
  Miller v University of Bristol, ET 1400780/2022; University of Bristol v Miller [2026] EAT 84.
• Acting because a third party is offended. The Court of Appeal held that dismissing an employee only because they expressed a protected belief that the employer objects to, “or which it fears will offend a third party with whom it wishes to protect its reputation”, is unlawful direct discrimination. It is lawful only if the employer could justifiably object to the way the belief was expressed and its response was proportionate.
  Higgs v Farmor’s School [2025] EWCA Civ 109, press summary; full judgment.
• Harassment and victimisation. An employer must not harass staff in relation to a protected characteristic, or treat them badly because they have raised or supported an Equality Act complaint.
  s.26 (harassment); s.27 (victimisation); s.13 (direct discrimination).
• Third-party harassment: new duty from 30 October 2026. The Equality Act’s original third-party harassment provisions were repealed in 2013. The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) Act 2023 added a duty to prevent sexual harassment only. Now the Employment Rights Act 2025 has inserted a new s.40(1A) into the Equality Act: an employer “must not permit a third party to harass” an employee. An employer is liable if the harassment happens “in the course of” the employee’s employment and the employer “failed to take all reasonable steps to prevent” it. This came into force on 30 October 2026. Whether online harassment outside work counts as “in the course of employment” will depend on the facts, so employers should take advice. But a campaign that targets someone because of their job, and urges people to contact their workplace, is the kind of situation where taking reasonable steps is prudent.
  Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013, s.65; Employment Rights Act 2025, s.21; SI 2026/1065, reg. 3; Equality Act 2010, s.40.

Fair investigation

The Acas Code of Practice says employers should deal with issues promptly and consistently, carry out the necessary investigations to establish the facts, tell the employee what the problem is, and give them the chance to put their case before any decision is made. Tribunals take the Code into account.
Sources: Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures; Acas guidance on investigations.

Freedom of expression (public bodies)

NHS bodies and other public authorities must act compatibly with the European Convention on Human Rights, including Article 10 (freedom of expression). Restrictions must be prescribed by law and necessary and proportionate. The courts apply the same proportionality test to employers’ responses to staff expressing their beliefs.
Sources: Human Rights Act 1998, s.6; Article 10, Schedule 1; Higgs v Farmor’s School.

Duty of care and health and safety

Employers must protect, so far as reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of their employees, and must assess risks to them. This includes work-related stress.
Sources: Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, s.2; Management of Health and Safety at Work Regulations 1999, reg. 3; HSE: work-related stress.

Data protection

Information revealing a person’s racial or ethnic origin, religious or philosophical beliefs or political opinions is “special category data”, with extra protection under the UK GDPR. As an employer, don’t confirm or add to staff details for campaigners or the media.
Sources: UK GDPR, Article 9; ICO: what is special category data?

NHS employers

The NHS Constitution says staff have the right to “healthy and safe working conditions and an environment free from harassment, bullying or violence” and to be “treated fairly, equally and free from discrimination”. Staff can also raise concerns through Freedom to Speak Up.
Sources: NHS Constitution for England; NHS England: Freedom to Speak Up; National Guardian’s Office.

Regulated professionals

Doctors and nurses have their own regulators, the GMC and the NMC, with their own processes. You don’t need to refer someone just because a campaign demands it. A referral should rest on a proper assessment of evidence against the regulator’s thresholds. The NMC’s guidance for employers covers “ensuring your decisions to refer are fair and unbiased” and shows many concerns can be managed locally. The GMC has said doctors “are entitled to their political opinions and have the right to campaign on issues”, within the law and its standards.
Sources: NMC: managing concerns, a resource for employers; GMC: personal beliefs and medical practice; GMC, 30 May 2024.

4. What to do: practical steps for employers

1. Don’t act on campaign pressure. Volume, anonymity and public tags are not evidence. Assess any complaint on its facts, through your normal procedure, as you would any other.
2. Support your staff member first. Speak to them, offer a referral to occupational health and access to wellbeing services, and agree how you will communicate. Carry out a stress risk assessment.
3. Protect their data. Don’t confirm their employment, rota, location or any other details to campaigners or the media.
4. Keep the evidence. Keep copies of complaints, emails, posts and calls, with dates, URLs and screenshots.
5. Report doxxing to the platform. Ask X and the website’s host (FlokiNET, abuse@flokinet.is, for gnasherjew.com) to remove personal data published without consent.
   Source: FlokiNET abuse reporting.
6. Consider the police. A course of conduct that causes alarm or distress can be an offence under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. Threats should always be reported.
   Source: Protection from Harassment Act 1997, s.1; Acas: what the law says about harassment.
7. Follow fair process. If there is something to investigate, follow the Acas Code: investigate first, tell the person what is alleged, let them respond and be accompanied, then decide proportionately.
8. Share complaints openly with them. Give your staff member any complaint you receive about them, in full, subject only to any redaction the law requires, so they know what is alleged and by whom and can respond. The Acas Code says that when an employee is told there is a case to answer, “it would normally be appropriate to provide copies of any written evidence, which may include any witness statements”.
   Source: Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures, para 9.
9. Refer to a regulator only on a proper basis. Apply the GMC’s or NMC’s thresholds, not the campaign’s demands.

Corrections

We aim to be accurate and fair. If anything on this page is wrong or out of date, including a later decision in any of the matters above, please email hcwsagainstcensorship@gmail.com and we will correct it promptly. CAA, UKLFI and GnasherJew are welcome to send a response, and we will consider adding it.

Not legal advice. This page gives general information about the law in England and Wales (Northern Ireland has its own equality law). Get legal advice on specific cases. Last checked: 1 November 2026.