A prominent Sikh organisation is preparing legal action against the government over plans to introduce a formal definition of Islamophobia.
The Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO), which represents Sikh communities across the UK, says it will seek a judicial review if Communities Secretary Steve Reed moves forward with the proposals. The NSO claims the move is discriminatory, potentially disadvantaging Sikhs and other faith groups by interfering with their right to freedom of thought and religion.
The group sent a pre-action letter to the government on September 19, warning of its intention to challenge the plans. Reed is expected to receive recommendations from a working group, established by his predecessor Angela Rayner, that aims to outline what constitutes unacceptable treatment or discrimination against Muslims. Critics have warned that such a definition could amount to a de facto blasphemy law, curbing free speech and the ability to debate aspects of Islam.
NSO: ‘Vague’ and subjective term
According to the NSO, their opposition is to “the vague word ‘Islamophobia’”, based on its subjectivity. A letter on the organisation’s official website explains, “It would be as absurd, for example, if Sikhs used the word ‘Sikhophobia’ to describe anti-Sikh discrimination. We consistently refer to events in 1984, as the anti-Sikh genocide. A phobia is an irrational fear, however, ‘Islamophobia’ encompasses not only anti-Muslim discrimination, but also legitimate criticism of Islam, the bad behaviour of some adherents of Islam, as well as, when non-Muslims – like Sikhs, Rastafarians or Coptic Christians face backlash following jihadist attacks.
“‘Islamophobia’ has often been deployed to shut down free and open discussion about matters of significant public interest, like ‘grooming gangs’, extremism and issues such as polygamy, misogyny and doctrinal hatred of non-believers or kuffars. “
The NSO argues that existing hate crime laws already provide adequate protections. It also cautions that the definition could unintentionally restrict discussion of Sikh history, which includes references to oppressive Muslim rulers. For instance, this year, Sikhs around the world will mark the 350th anniversary of the martyrdom of the ninth Guru of Sikhism, Guru Tegh Bahadur, who gave his life defending the freedom of belief of Hindus who were being forced to convert to Islam under the sword by one of India’s Mughal rulers.
Simply recounting this historical truth would be deemed ‘Islamophobic’ according to the APPG definition of ‘Islamophobia’. The organisation adds that some Sikh practices, such as abstaining from ritually slaughtered meat, could be wrongly interpreted as Islamophobic under the proposed framework.
Wider community concerns
Writing for his weekly Asian Voice column, ‘Kapil’s Khichadi’ in July, Kapil Dudakia also noted, “The fear surrounding APPG (Muslim) definition is genuine since it basically muzzles everyone from even expressing their concern about anything Islamic, or Muslims. Basically, it would become the de facto blasphemy law specifically to protect one faith from any challenge or criticism and destroy the very concept of ‘Freedom of Speech’.
“The repulsion to what the government was seen to be doing has become more pronounced. Especially after the fiasco of how it handled the Pakistani grooming gang’s statutory inquiry.”
Conservative MP Kevin Hollinrake has previously warned that the definition could resemble a “blasphemy law.” Others, such as Nick Timothy had also encouraged people to oppose the definition, calling it a threat to free expression.
Hindu Council UK (HCUK) has also voiced concerns that the council “comprising of some Muslims only”, may bring in Islamism into the UK as a matter of policy. “This will harm not only the Hindus, but we believe the 99% of likeminded Muslims too”, according to HCUK.
“We had advised that the Islamophobia definition should be debated by all faiths and recommended to bring back Sir Tony Blair’s integrative Faith Communities Consultative Council as a way to do that, but Angela Raynor seems to be sidelining us and our suggestions altogether”, the organisation added.
Some observers say the backlash reflects growing concerns that mass immigration is undermining national identity and social cohesion, particularly where newcomers are perceived as resisting integration. Tensions have also been fuelled by public anger over historic failures to tackle grooming gangs, often involving men of Pakistani Muslim heritage, who targeted vulnerable white girls.
A report by Baroness Casey found that authorities sometimes hesitated to act decisively out of fear of being labelled racist. Critics argue the government’s reluctance to fully confront these issues has further eroded public trust.
A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said, “No decisions on a definition have been made, and we will not accept any definition which damages freedom of speech or discriminates against religious communities.”
