Anti-Muslim hostility definition unfair on other faiths, say Hindu and Sikh groups

TOI correspondent from London: Hindu and Sikh groups have criticised a non-statutory (not legally binding) definition of anti-Muslim hostility and the appointment of an “Islamophobia tsar” by the UK govt, saying it will foster resentment and marginalise other faiths.

The Network of Sikh Organisations and the Free Speech Union are drawing up pre-action letters to send to UK communities secretary Steve Reed, ahead of challenging the definition via a judicial review. The Hindu Council UK (HCUK) has criticised the govt for not consulting other faiths.

“All faiths and beliefs should be treated equally,” the Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO) said in a statement.

“If the govt have a special working group for one faith, what about the others? If a special ‘tsar’ is appointed to protect the interests of one faith, why the exclusivity,” the NSO asked. “Criminal law provides protection for all religious groups. Why do we even need a non-statutory definition,” it asked.


The NSO expressed concerns the definition would curtail free speech on important matters such as grooming gangs. “Could the Sikh objection to halal slaughter of animals be interpreted as ‘hostility’,” it said.

The definition, introduced on Monday, defines anti-Muslim hostility as criminal acts including verbal harassment directed at Muslims because of their religion; treating Muslims as a collective group with fixed characteristics; and practices designed to disadvantage them. The ministry of housing, communities and local government (MHCLG) said it was needed because hate crimes targeting Muslims were “at record levels”.

Vinod Popat, convenor of Hindu Community Organisations Group, has written to Reed asking why there is no recognition of Hinduphobia.

“Harrow Siddhashram’s recent Holi celebrations were attacked by a group of 20 youths and yet the Harrow police statement seemed to have played down this vicious attack,” HCUK said in a statement.

It referred to a sentence in the social cohesion policy paper “Protecting What Matters”, accompanying the definition, which claimed that the 2022 Leicester unrest was “partly linked to the import of nationalist rhetoric and religious extremism”.

“This is misinformation,” HCUK said. “Hindu temples and homes were attacked.” It said Hindus had no faith in the implementation of this policy and said such misinformation was contributing to Hindus being attacked in Harrow and Wembley.