Failing to adopt a definition of anti-Muslim hostility would signal to British Muslims that their safety does not matter, a charity’s head has warned, as critics argue that adopting a definition risks breaking the law.
Shaista Gohir, a cross-bench peer and head of the Muslim Women’s Network, was part of a working group on anti-Muslim hatred and Islamophobia launched by the government in 2025 to define what would constitute unacceptable treatment, prejudice and discrimination against Muslims.
It is understood that a proposal submitted to the government for consideration in October put forward a definition for anti-Muslim hostility, as opposed to anti-Muslim hatred or Islamophobia. The non-statutory definition was intended to protect people in line with existing law and legislation, said Lady Gohir, who criticised Downing Street for its handling of the issue after government figures showed hate crimes against Muslims rose by nearly a fifth in 2025.
“Every group has the right to be protected. The only reason why we’re asking for it is because of the high levels of abuse,” said Gohir, who spoke of increased personal attacks.
“We’ve got an election in about three years’ time and it’s just going to get worse,” she added. “And personally, if I’m going to blame anybody, I’m blaming No 10.”
Gohir’s intervention comes as research reveals most British Muslims feel negative about their future in the UK. Muslim Census’s “The Crisis of Belonging” report found only 8.2% felt positive about their future in the UK, while 62.7% said they felt negative. Just over half – 51.9% – said they felt they “strongly belong to the UK”, plunging from the 93% reported in an Ipsos Mori 10 years ago. Rising Islamophobia, the political climate, “feeling unwelcome in their own country” and job security were identified as concerns in the survey of 4,800 people, conducted in partnership with charities Islamic Relief UK and the National Zakat Foundation.
The Muslim Census analysed British Muslims’ financial health and “sense of belonging”. Last month, a report by the Commons’ women and equalities committee found Muslim women were disproportionately likely to face hostility and abuse, and that rising online, verbal and physical abuse and discrimination was deeply affecting individual lives and corroding community cohesion.
The adoption of a definition has been met with criticism from other UK faith groups who argue it would limit freedom of expression and the ability to criticise Islam. The Conservative thinktank Policy Exchange has said it would be used to undermine Britain’s counter-terrorism laws, immigration rules and foreign policy “without democratic consent”, and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) has strongly opposed the adoption of any definition, arguing it risks “breaking the law”.
“Legal protections against discrimination and hate crime already exist, so it is unclear what role a new definition would play in addressing discrimination and abuse targeted at Muslims,” an EHRC spokesperson said. “An official non-statutory definition risks being in conflict with existing legal definitions and provisions, resulting in inconsistency and potential confusion for courts and individuals.”
Under the Equality Act 2010, Islam is protected as a religion, but Muslims are not defined as a racial group so are not covered by protection against racial discrimination. In 2019, the Labour party adopted a working definition of Islamophobia from the all-party parliamentary group on British Muslims, which said: “Islamophobia is rooted in racism and is a type of racism that targets expressions of Muslimness or perceived Muslimness.”
The definition was adopted by many organisations, as well as by the Liberal Democrats and Scottish Conservatives. However, the Westminster government and Conservative party did not follow suit, arguing the definition had “not been broadly accepted” and needed further consideration. In 2016, the government adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, which has been taken up by the main UK parties.
The working group on anti-Muslim hatred and Islamophobia is chaired by the barrister Dominic Grieve KC, who was attorney general for England and Wales between 2010 and 2014. Should it go ahead, the proposed definition is expected to be put to a consultation.
Gohir said opposition to a proposed definition was done deliberately to put pressure on the government to not adopt one, adding the proposal had been widely consulted on and would not interfere with freedom of speech. Instead it could act as a tool for police and across other settings to assess anti-Muslim hostility, she said, and give people confidence to report discrimination.
Last year, more than three dozen Labour and independent MPs wrote to the communities secretary, Steve Reed, urging him to adopt an Islamophobia definition after government statistics revealed a rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes from 2,690 offences to 3,199 in the 12 months to March 2025 in England and Wales, where 3.9 million people identify as Muslim.
“When the antisemitism definition was put forward and endorsed by the government and endorsed by many organisations, [there was] not a peep from anyone, none of this campaign to say we don’t want a definition,” said Gohir, who was among five independent experts tasked with creating a working definition of anti-Muslim hatred/Islamophobia. “There’s unequal treatment.”
“If they do not adopt a definition the Labour government will be sending a message to the Muslim communities that you don’t matter, your safety does not matter, Muslims do not matter,” she added.
