The Push To End Free Speech

UK: The Push to End Free Speech

by Judith Bergman

• "We are concerned that the definition... could be used to challenge legitimate free speech on the historical or theological actions of Islamic states. There is also a risk it could also undermine counter-terrorism powers, which seek to tackle extremism or prevent terrorism." — Martin Hewitt, Chair, National Police Chiefs' Council.
  
  
• Islam represents an idea, not a nationality or an ethnicity. The conventional purpose of most hate-speech laws is to protect people from hatred, not ideas.
  
  
• The new proposed definition would criminalize criticism of Islam. Considering the origins of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslims, that is probably the whole point.
  
  
• "[A]n alternative definition of Anti-Muslim Hatred should be specific and narrow. It should focus on addressing bigotry directed at individuals, and avoid censoring debate or freedom of expression on religion. Finally, a comprehensive definition of Anti-Muslim Hatred must take intra-Muslim hatred into account to protect those who want to speak freely or express themselves differently." — Nikita Malik, Forbes, May 20, 2019.
  
  
  
  
  In April 2018, Britain's All-Party Parliamentary Group on British Muslimsbegan work on establishing a "working definition of Islamophobia that can be widely accepted by Muslims, political parties and the government".
  
  
  
  
  In December 2018, the group concluded its work with a "Report on the inquiry into a working definition of Islamophobia / anti-Muslim hatred." The report defines "Islamophobia" as a form of racism, conflating religion with ethnic origin or nationality: "Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness."[1]
  
  
  
  
  Similarly, the UK government, according to a Buzzfeed report, is concerned that defining Islamophobia as a form of racism "could mean people who criticise aspects of Islam might be prosecuted under discrimination laws."
  The UK government is right, of course. Islam represents an idea, not a nationality or an ethnicity. The conventional purpose of most hate-speech laws is to protect people from hatred, not ideas. The new proposed definition would criminalize criticism of Islam.
  
  
  
  
  Sharia law prohibits questioning, seeming to regard it as a form of blasphemy:

  "O you who have believed, do not ask about things which, if they are shown to you, will distress you. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be shown to you. Allah has pardoned that which is past; and Allah is Forgiving and Forbearing." [Qur'an 5:101, Sahih International translation]
  "A people asked such [questions] before you; then they became thereby disbelievers." [Qur'an 5:102, Sahih International translation]

  The prohibition against questioning also seems why several Muslim organizations, such as the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), fight for the introduction of blasphemy laws in the West, to prevent questioning Islam.