Free Speech Union Launches Legal Action Against Labour’s Islamophobia Definition

The Free Speech Union is launching a legal challenge against the Government over Labour’s plans to introduce an official definition of “anti-Muslim hostility”, warning it could become a “blasphemy law by the back door”. GB News has the story.

Campaigners warn the outcome of the case could shape the future boundaries of free speech in Britain, particularly when it comes to discussion of religion, belief and cultural issues.

The challenge is being mounted by the Free Speech Union, which says the proposal risks silencing legitimate debate about religion and could lead to tens of thousands of complaints every year.

The group is also challenging the Government’s decision to appoint an “anti-Muslim hostility tsar” tasked with overseeing how the definition is applied.

Critics fear the move could suppress free speech by encouraging organisations and institutions to punish people accused of offending Muslims – even when no law has been broken. They say existing legislation already protects people from discrimination.

The union’s Director, Lord Toby Young, warned the policy represents a major threat to open debate.

“This is the most serious threat to free speech the Government has come up with so far – the only area in which it’s achieving any success,” he said.

“If we don’t win this fight, tens of thousands of people a year could lose their jobs at the say-so of a Labour-appointed ‘tsar’. It’s dystopian.”

The Government has said the new definition – previously discussed under the label ‘Islamophobia”’– is intended to help identify and respond to discrimination and hostility directed at Muslims.

But campaigners argue that the wording being proposed is too vague and subjective, and could be used to shut down criticism of religion or discussion of issues relating to Islam.

The Free Speech Union claims the definition includes unclear language such as “negative and prejudicial stereotyping of Muslims”, which it says lacks a precise legal meaning and could easily be misused.

The organisation argues that once the definition is adopted by Government departments, councils, universities and other institutions, it could lead to people being put through disciplinary processes and losing their jobs, even though it has no formal legal status.

Campaigners point to the rapid growth in police recording of ‘non-crime hate incidents’ (NCHIs) – cases where speech is logged despite no criminal offence being committed.

Under current guidance, police can record incidents if someone perceives words or behaviour to be motivated by hostility linked to a protected characteristic.

Free speech advocates say the system has already led to hundreds of thousands of reports being logged over lawful comments.

The Free Speech Union fears the new definition could lead to a surge in complaints.

It has been estimated the new plan could result in around 20,000 reports of “anti-Muslim hostility” each year – a huge increase compared with the current number of recorded anti-Muslim hate crimes, which stands at roughly 4,000 a year.

Campaigners say the risk is that organisations will adopt the definition in order to demonstrate they are tackling discrimination – even if doing so means disciplining staff or investigating people over lawful speech.

The group argues that in a democratic society no religion should be protected from criticism or debate.

Worth reading in full.