Dozens of members of the House of Lords have said that plans to create a latest definition of ‘Islamophobia’ are a threat to free speech and social harmony.
In an open letter, the 36 peers warned that the proposed non-statutory definition could be used to shut down debate about Islam. They said that “defining ‘Islamophobia/Anti-Muslim Hatred’ and urging universities to ban it can inevitably inhibit legitimate academic research about Islam.”
Anyone perceived to have committed ‘Islamophobia’ at a university could find themselves facing severe sanctions. As an example, the Lords pointed to the previous head of the Equalities and Human Rights Commission, Sir Trevor Phillips.
Phillips was suspended from the Labour Party for falling foul of the party’s Islamophobia definition, which it’s now considering imposing on the entire country. Although Phillips was later reinstated, the incident demonstrates how accusations of Islamophobia will be used to stifle free speech.
The letter also notes that even with no more stringent definition, the term ‘Islamophobia’ is already getting used to attack those that are critical of Islam or the behaviour of Muslims.
The Islamic Human Rights Commission nominated Baroness Casey for “Islamophobe of the Year” in 2017, not long after her report on social cohesion claimed that many Muslim communities had effectively segregated themselves from British society fairly than integrating.
Sarah Champion MP was also shortlisted for the award. She played a key role in exposing rape gangs in Rotherham comprising mostly Pakistani-heritage men.
The Lords argue that Muslims in Britain need no special treatment and that there are already laws corresponding to the Public Order Act 1986, which are supposed to protect people from racial or religious hatred and discrimination.
Other critics, including Conservative MP Nick Timothy, state that even the Public Order Act is a threat to free speech, with numerous people already arrested and sometimes convicted for offending Islam.
The Christian Institute has also got involved in the controversy, providing evidence to the Islamophobia Working Group, which is considering the federal government’s proposal.
The Institute said, “A latest term risks confusing criticism of Islam as a faith – a democratic right – with hostility to Muslims as people. This confusion is most explicit with the term Islamophobia.
“Formally embracing an idea of ‘cultural racism’ risks threatening the liberty to criticise features of Islamic culture. A member of an organisation that has signed as much as this sort of definition might be disciplined for Islamophobia in the event that they criticise mandatory female head coverings or suggest that UK law is preferable to sharia law.
“Free speech protections are afforded for discussion and criticism of faith under section 29J of the Public Order Act, which don’t apply to race. If defined as a race, Islam could due to this fact receive special protection from criticism, thereby undermining healthy debate and democratic discussion.”
 Dozens of members of the House of Lords have said that plans to create a latest definition of 'Islamophobia' are a threat to...){kind=link}