United Nations Definition
“A fear, prejudice and hatred of Muslims or non-Muslim individuals that leads to provocation, hostility and intolerance by means of threatening, harassment, abuse, incitement and intimidation of Muslims and non Muslims, both in the online and offline world. Motivated by institutional, ideological, political and religious hostility that transcends into structural and cultural racism which targets the symbols and markers of a being a Muslim.”
Conflict with UK Equality and Human Rights legislation
This definition of Islamophobia could potentially conflict with aspects of the UK’s Equality Act 2010 and the Human Rights Act 1998, depending on how it is interpreted and applied. Below are some key areas where tensions could arise:
1. Conflict with the Equality Act 2010
The Equality Act 2010 protects individuals from discrimination based on protected characteristics, including religion or belief. However, it also protects people’s rights to criticize religious beliefs without facing discrimination claims.
- Potential Conflict:
The definition includes targeting of symbols and markers of being a Muslim, which could be interpreted to include criticism of Islamic practices, clothing, or beliefs. This could create issues where religious practices come into conflict with other protected rights (e.g., gender equality or LGBT rights). If the definition were used to suppress legitimate debate about religion, it could clash with freedom of expression protections within the Equality Act. - Legitimate Concern:
The Act already protects Muslims from discrimination or harassment, so a separate definition might not be necessary for legal purposes. If applied too broadly, the definition could restrict discussions about Sharia law, gender roles, or religious extremism, which would normally be considered lawful debate.
2. Conflict with the Human Rights Act 1998
The Human Rights Act 1998 incorporates the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. Key rights that could be affected include:
- Article 9 (Freedom of Thought, Conscience, and Religion)
Individuals have the right to practice their religion, but also the right to criticize or reject religion. The definition’s emphasis on “hostility that targets symbols and markers of being a Muslim” could be used to suppress criticism of religious customs, attire, or beliefs, potentially infringing on others’ freedom of expression. - Article 10 (Freedom of Expression)
People have the right to express opinions, including those that may offend, shock, or disturb. If this definition were legally enforced, it could criminalize legitimate debate about Islamic theology, history, or practices. This would create a chilling effect on free speech. - Article 14 (Prohibition of Discrimination)
The definition focuses exclusively on Islamophobia and Muslims but does not address prejudice against other religious or non-religious groups. If applied in a legal setting, it could create unequal protections, which might itself be discriminatory.
Conclusion
While the definition aims to combat anti-Muslim hatred, its broad wording raises legal and human rights concerns. If enforced in law or policy, it could clash with protections for freedom of expression and equal treatment under the law. A more precise definition distinguishing between legitimate criticism of Islam and anti-Muslim hate speech would likely avoid these conflicts.
