
UK Islamophobia definition to protect right to 'insult religions'
The UK government has published more details about a working group set up to advise it on a possible definition of Islamophobia which would also protect the right to "insult" religious beliefs and practices.
The membership of the working group appears to signal that the government is engaging with the recently launched British Muslim Network (BMN), but not the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) - the largest umbrella body claiming to represent British Muslims.
Dominic Grieve, a former Conservative attorney general, has been appointed chair of the group with BMN co-chair Akeela Ahmed among its four other members.
Earlier this year it emerged that the government was planning to create a working group to draw up an official definition for anti-Muslim discrimination.
This suggested it was rowing back plans to adopt the definition proposed in 2018 by the All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) for British Muslims.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
That definition, which the Conservative government rejected, was criticised by some as potentially stifling criticism of Islam, which the APPG strongly denied.
Adopted by Labour in opposition, the definition characterises Islamophobia as "a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness".
In September 2024, Labour's faith minister Lord Wajid Khan said that "the definition proposed by the APPG is not in line with the Equality Act 2010, which defines race in terms of colour, nationality and national or ethnic origins".
Freedom of speech
The new working group's terms of reference, published on Monday, include giving advice on "the merits of government adopting a non-statutory definition of unacceptable treatment of Muslims and anyone perceived to be Muslim, including what a proposed definition should be".
This establishes that the government has not yet decided that it will adopt any definition of Islamophobia.
In apparent reference to widespread criticism, the terms say that any proposed definition "must be compatible with the unchanging right of British citizens to exercise freedom of speech and expression - which includes the right to criticise, express dislike of, or insult religions and/or the beliefs and practices of adherents."
Ahmed's inclusion in the working group comes just weeks after the official launch of the BMN in February with backing from faith minister Khan, and after Middle East Eye had previously revealed it had lost much of its Muslim support and was being backed by a charity set up by disgraced former Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby.
Exclusive: British Muslim Network backed by charity set up by former archbishop Welby Read More »
MEE reported ahead of the launch that several Muslim MPs privately said they would not attend after a series of controversies.
Critics have suggested that the BMN's co-chairs and advisory board lack credibility, warning that the government could use the network to continue to avoid engaging with the Muslim Council of Britain.
But the BMN's leadership has argued that the government should engage with a "whole range" of Muslim groups, including both the MCB and BMN.
Consecutive governments have followed a policy of refusing to engage with the MCB - despite it having over 500 member organisations, including mosques, schools, local and county councils, professional networks and advocacy groups.
Starmer's government adopted this approach and even ignored communications from the MCB during the far-right riots that raged across the country for over a week in August.
The BMN does not claim to be a similarly representative body. But its representation on the new working group indicates that the government has chosen to engage with the organisation while continuing to boycott the MCB.
Another notable omission from the membership list is Tell Mama, an Islamophobia reporting service funded by the communities ministry and accused of severely under-reporting hate crimes.
The Guardian reported earlier this month that no grant will be provided to the organisation from the end of March, leaving it facing closure.
Working definition
Also on the working group is Professor Javed Khan, managing director of Equi, a new think tank which says it was "born out of the UK Muslim community".
At the parliamentary launch of an Equi report last month, Khan told parliamentarians and civil society figures that the think tank was "seeing engagement" from the Labour government, including ministers and special advisers.
"The government needs to be faith literate in its policy development," he said.
Equi's report on Muslims in the British arts and culture scene notably warned that Muslim creatives are often "herded" into receiving funding from the contentious Prevent counter-extremism programme, which "often toxifies, devalues and limits artistic intent".
British Muslim creators 'herded' into Prevent funding, says Equi think tank Read More »
Grieve, the chair of the working group, previously chaired the Citizens' UK Commission on Islam, aimed at promoting dialogue between Muslims and non-Muslims, and wrote the foreword to the contentious APPG report on Islamophobia in 2018, calling it "food both for thought and positive action".
He said last month that "defining Islamophobia is extremely difficult for perfectly valid reasons relating to freedom of expression", but noted that "perfectly law-abiding Muslims going about their business and well integrated into society are suffering discrimination and abuse".
Baroness Shaista Gohir, a crossbench peer and CEO of Muslim Women's Network UK (MWNUK), is another member of the working group.
MEE revealed in late February that an MWNUK event in parliament in March celebrating the "cultural contribution of Muslims in the UK" was supported by TikTok, the social media giant accused of censoring content on human rights abuses faced by Uyghur Muslims in China.
Aisha Affi, an independent consultant, is also named as a member of the working group.
The terms of reference say that the group will have six months to deliver a working definition of Islamophobia to ministers.
It establishes that the government "has the right to disband the Group at any point and without notice if they deem that it is no longer meeting its aims and objectives".
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
US is not committed to a Palestinian state, Muslim neighbours could give land, US ambassador says
A Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank is no longer a US policy goal, but Israel's 'Muslim neighbours' could give up their land to create one, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee told Bloomberg news on Tuesday. 'Unless there are some significant things that happen that change the culture, there's no room for it,' Huckabee, an appointee of US President Donald Trump and longtime advocate of settlement expansion in the occupied West Bank said when asked about a Palestinian state. He added those steps probably won't occur 'in our lifetime,' he added. Pressed on the topic, Huckabee repeated an explosive claim floated by some Israeli officials, that neighbouring Muslim countries could give their land to the Palestinians to create a state. 'Where is it gonna be? Does it have to be in Judea and Samaria?' Huckabee asked. 'Does it need to be somewhere different? New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Huckabee did not rule out taking land from Saudi Arabia to create a Palestinian state, saying 'every option should be on the table,' when pressed. 'Muslim controlled countries have six hundred and forty-four times the amount of land Israel does. When people say Israel needs to give up something you kind of scratch your head and say let me see if I get this right…'why should these people [Israelis] give way when these people [muslim countries] have a lot of room that they could say 'we'll carve out something'.' Huckabee's comments are likely to irk Egypt and Jordan. Their leaders fear that Israel wants to forcibly displace Palestinians from Gaza and the occupied West Bank onto their land. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated in May that carrying out a plan US President Donald Trump introduced earlier this year to forcibly displace Palestinians from Gaza and turn it into a 'Middle East Riviera' was now a condition for ending Israel's war on Gaza. Displacing Palestinians Huckabee's refusal to rule out carving out a Palestinians state in Saudi Arabia is likely to inflame tensions. Netanyahu suggested in February that Palestinians should establish a state in Saudi Arabia, rather than in their homeland, in his latest dismissal of Palestinians' right to self-determination. His comments drew a sharp rebuke from Riyadh. In his first term, Trump floated a Middle East peace plan dubbed the Deal of the century that called for a de facto rump Palestinian state without full sovereignty. But at the very least, that plan focused on fashioning a pseudo-state in the occupied West Bank. Huckabee's comments are more hardline because he refuses to rule out displacing Palestinians in full. Since the 1950's, successive American administration have stated that their ultimate goal to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is a two-state solution. Many experts and diplomats have earmarked occupied East Jerusalem, the occupied West Bank and Gaza, which Israel seized from Egypt and Jordan in the 1967 war as the heartland of a future Palestinian state. Huckabee is a prominent leader in the pro-Israel evangelical Christian movement, who has repeatedly denied the Palestinian national identity. Huckabee advocated for the forcible displacement of Palestinians during the early days of Israel's war on Gaza. 'If the so-called Palestinians are so loved by the Muslim nations of the world, why wont any of those nations at least offer to give temporary refuge to their brothers and sisters in Gaza,' he said in October 2023. He has been an outspoken advocate for Israel's annexation of the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip. 'I think Israel has title deed to Judea and Samaria,' he told Politico in 2017, using the Hebrew language terms for the occupied West Bank. 'There are certain words I refuse to use. There is no such thing as a West Bank. It's Judea and Samaria. There's no such thing as a settlement. They're communities, they're neighborhoods, they're cities. There's no such thing as an occupation,' he said at the time.


Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
By threatening the ICC, David Cameron disgraced Britain
By threatening the International Criminal Court's chief prosecutor, former British Foreign Secretary David Cameron has joined Russian President Vladimir Putin among a small group of unsavoury world leaders who have menaced or bullied the ICC. In plain English, the former foreign secretary (and former prime minister) has been caught red-handed in an attempt to pervert the course of justice. The motive for Cameron's appalling conduct: a determination to protect Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant, from war crimes charges. In the words of the ICC, these war crimes included 'starvation as a method of warfare; and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution, and other inhumane acts'. Cameron told ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan that issuing an arrest warrant against Netanyahu and Gallant would be 'like dropping a hydrogen bomb'. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters Cameron's contempt for the rule of law and readiness to resort to menace and intimidation is standard procedure from the likes of Putin, Netanyahu and US President Donald Trump. But Britain is a country that prides itself on respect for the rule of law. We claim to be part of a moral international order. We ought to be better than that - much better. No excuses The fact that Cameron resorted to menace in order to protect the reputation of Netanyahu, a suspected war criminal, places Britain as a part of a group of gangster nations and rogue states for whom might is right. Cameron has therefore disgraced himself and the Conservative Party - and above all, he has disgraced Britain. There are no excuses. He cannot claim inexperience. Cameron was British prime minister for six years, and he had been brought back as foreign secretary when he sought to intimidate Khan. Exclusive: David Cameron threatened to withdraw UK from ICC over Israel war crimes probe Read More » So far, there has been no response from the Foreign Office or Downing Street to Middle East Eye's revelations about Cameron's despicable behaviour. The Foreign Office declined to comment in response to an MEE request. That silence is deafening. To avoid Britain's reputation being permanently besmirched, Prime Minister Keir Starmer has a duty to come out and make a statement, conveying that he is horrified and disgusted by Cameron's conduct as foreign secretary. He also needs to restate Britain's commitment to the ICC and the values it embodies. This intervention is all the more urgent, because putting pressure on the ICC could constitute a criminal act under British domestic law as well as international law. The Rome Statute that established the ICC does not just prosecute those who commit war crimes. It also criminalises those who seek to prevent war crimes from being prosecuted. The relevant passage of the Rome Statute, Article 70, awards the court jurisdiction over those responsible for 'impeding, intimidating or corruptly influencing an official of the Court for the purpose of forcing or persuading the official not to perform, or to perform improperly, his or her duties'. Cameron's threat to 'defund the court and withdraw from the Rome Statute' falls squarely within ICC jurisdiction. Reckless actions There are also potential consequences under domestic law. Section 54 (1) of the International Criminal Court Act 2001 notes: 'A person intentionally committing any of the acts mentioned in article 70.1 (offences against the administration of justice in relation to the ICC) may be dealt with as for the corresponding domestic offence committed in relation to a superior court in England and Wales.' In short, Cameron now finds himself in hot water. One lawyer with whom I spoke last night, while not conversant with all the details, told me that in his judgment, the case for a prosecution is strong. A British foreign secretary tried to subvert the course of justice. Cameron needs to break his silence and to explain himself In Britain, the maximum penalty for perverting the course of justice is life imprisonment, though in practice sentences are likely to be much lower. Leaving aside the possible long-term consequences of Cameron's reckless behaviour, the immediate political reverberations are immense. Britain is a country that prides itself on the rule of law. We claim to be part of the rules-based international order. To his eternal credit, Khan, a British citizen, stood up to Cameron's threats. But the inescapable fact remains that a British foreign secretary tried to subvert the course of justice. Cameron needs to break his silence and to explain himself. Meanwhile, Starmer would be well-advised to order an urgent enquiry into the shocking revelation that Cameron sought to intimidate the chief prosecutor of the ICC. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.


Middle East Eye
3 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
UK and allies sanction Israeli ministers Ben Gvir and Smotrich over 'monstrous' Gaza comments
The United Kingdom and several of its allies have sanctioned far-right Israeli ministers Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich over over their "monstrous" comments about Gaza. In a significant break from Washington, the UK is imposing asset freezes and travel bans on Israel's National Security Minister Ben Gvir - a West Bank settler - and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich. The two have fiercely opposed the entry of international aid into Gaza and advocated for the forced expulsion of Palestinians from the territory, with Ben Gvir has called for Israel to "encourage the voluntary emigration of the residents of Gaza". Meanwhile, Smotrich pledged last month that "Gaza will be entirely destroyed" and that Palestinians will "leave in great numbers to third countries." Speaking to the BBC, UK Foreign Secretery David Lammy said the ministers, along with the Israeli government had been repeatedly warned against "encouraging egregious abuses of human rights." New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters "Alongside our partners, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway today, we are announcing sanctions against those individuals, because we have been absolutely clear this has to stop. "We stand by a two state solution, and the violence that we've seen in the West Bank, particularly, is entirely unacceptable and must stop." Smotrich vows to 'rebuild temple' during Jerusalem Day celebrations Read More » Smotrich has long advocated for extending Israeli sovereignty over the occupied West Bank and Gaza, and across the Middle East as part of his vision of a 'Greater Israel'. He also declared that Israel would 'apply sovereignty' in the occupied West Bank before the next Israeli general elections in October 2026. 'Within a few months, we will be able to declare that we have won. Gaza will be totally destroyed,' Smotrich said. 'In another six months, Hamas won't exist as a functioning entity.' On Tuesday, Foreign Minister Gideon Saar said that Israel had been informed by the UK of its decision to impose sanctions on the two government ministers, describing the move as "outrageous". "We were informed about the UK decision to include two of our ministers on the British sanctions list," Saar told a press conference. "It is outrageous that elected representatives and members of the government are subjected to these kinds of measures."