CAGE report exposes how the government’s “anti-Muslim hostility” definition demonstrates a lack of regard for the safety of Muslims

London — Today CAGE International publishes a new report, A Critique of the UK Government’s “Anti-Muslim Hostility” Definition: Disingenuous, Double Standards, and the Normalisation of Islamophobia. It finds that the government’s new definition was designed to leave the state’s own role in producing Islamophobia untouched.

The report is published during Islamophobia Awareness Month, as anti-Muslim hate crime reaches record levels. Only last month, the Hasanah Centre mosque in Stratford had its windows smashed and its prayer hall strewn with glass. Yet the government’s definition, unveiled in March, does not use the word Islamophobia once. It requires proof of intent in every one of its three parts, carries no legal force, and explicitly protects the right to ridicule and insult Islam.

CAGE’s report argues that this is not a failure of understanding. The most powerful driver of Islamophobia in Britain is the state itself. Through Prevent, extremism policy and an expanding set of counter-terrorism powers, Muslim belief, practice and political expression have been turned into objects of suspicion in schools, hospitals, universities and public institutions across the country. These powers were built by exploiting fears and prejudices about Muslims. Once established, they are used to extend state power in ways that erode everyone’s rights. A definition limited to individual acts of provable hostility can never reach any of this.

The report also documents a process that shut Muslims out. The Muslim Council of Britain was barred from the consultation, and the working group’s own recommendations were diluted by ministers. It sets out the stark contrast with the government’s swift and institution-wide adoption of the IHRA definition of anti-semitism.

Eight months on, the special representative promised to implement the definition has still not been appointed, despite ministers telling Muslim representatives at Downing Street on 27 October that a name would be announced within the week.

Anas Mustapha, Head of Public Advocacy at CAGE International, said:

“The government has spent years refusing to name Islamophobia, and this definition is the result. It protects the right to insult Islam, demands proof of intent that almost no victim can provide, and ignores the policies through which the state itself has made suspicion of Muslims a public duty. Prevent and counter terror powers built around it rest on fear of Muslims, and they are now being turned on everyone’s rights. The message this definition sends is clear: the safety of Muslims in Britain is simply not a government priority. Muslim communities should refuse to endorse it and build a definition of their own.”

The report closes with recommendations for the government and for Muslim communities. These include reinstating the term Islamophobia, removing the intent requirement, abandoning the special representative role, and a definition built by the community, for the community.

​