My organisation helps Muslims – are we now considered extremists?

I fear that, for the wider Muslim community and for organisations like ours, this new definition will only continue to do more harm than good (Picture: PA)

Today, the government announced their new definition of extremism, and as the head of Britain’s largest Muslim advocacy group, the Muslim Council of Britain, I’m worried. 

While we weren’t announced as one of the five groups that minister Michael Gove wants to assess under this new criteria, for weeks now, our organisation has been subject to smears and insinuation that we would be judged against this extremism criteria as well. 

If we did, it would mean that the hundreds of mosques and Islamic associations affiliated to us – and the hundreds of thousands of those attending these institutions – would all be tarred with this offensive brush. And that is a huge problem.

Extremism is a serious matter. We should all be united in opposing this harm.

Yet, the Government’s new extremism definition, in my view, hinders this common objective. It alienates and deems the very groups and individuals who have opposed extremism as extremists themselves. 

They will consider all those who intentionally create a ‘permissive environment’ to negate or destroy the fundamental rights and freedoms of others or who ‘undermine, overturn or replace the UK’s system of liberal parliamentary democracy and democratic rights as extremist.

It is no wonder, therefore, that the new proposed definition has sparked widespread criticism from a wide section of political, civil society, human rights and faith groups across the UK, including the one I lead.

Former Home Secretaries Priti Patel, Sajid Javid, and Amber Rudd, along with leading counter-terror and extremism experts, all Conservatives, have cautioned against the government’s exploitation of extremism definitions for political gain.

Meanwhile, Archbishops Justin Welby and Stephen Cottrell also warned of the disproportionate impact this new definition will have on Muslim communities.

As the head of Britain’s largest Muslim advocacy group, the Muslim Council of Britain, I’m worried about the government’s new definition of extremism (Picture: Zara Mohammed)

All of the above rightly argue for a more broad-based conversation involving, not excluding, others.

Yet exclusion is already the order of the day for this government.

Just last month, it pulled funding from the excellent Inter Faith Network (IFN), causing it to close after a former office-bearer of the Muslim Council of Britain became a trustee of the network.

This was not only wrong, but shows the unconscious bias that already exists.

It doesn’t seem to matter that, for the last 26 years, together with our affiliates, we have pioneered integration initiatives through events like Visit My Mosque Day and supported our thriving Muslim charity sector who give so much to wider society.

Now does our support for community responses during the pandemic and celebration of the sacrifice and commitment of Muslims in our armed forces seem to count. 

Somehow, in some quarters, we are still deemed extremist.  

In defending this poorly conceived plan, Mr Gove suggests that the minister should decide based on the ‘impartial’ determinations of a star chamber, or in his words ‘a Centre for Excellence’ staffed by experts. 

When it comes to expertise in Muslim communities, we know very well that impartiality has been sorely lacking. 

And these so-called ‘experts’ not only demonstrate very little grasp of Britain’s diverse Muslim communities, but also have no meaningful engagement with Muslim communities.   

As such, this definition will have an immediate impact on civil liberties. It will even have broader implications for social cohesion and community relations, particularly concerning the portrayal and treatment of minority groups. 

Former Home Secretaries Priti Patel, Sajid Javid, and Amber Rudd have cautioned against the government’s exploitation of extremism definitions for political gain (Picture: GETTY IMAGES)

The risk of alienating entire communities through these arbitrary categorisations cannot be overstated. This definition will undoubtedly undermine efforts to foster unity and mutual understanding within society. 

I personally can’t help but find these proposals particularly galling coming so soon after the governing party itself is facing plausible accusations of Islamophobic and racist extremism, especially after threats against MP Diane Abbott.  

And for a government that has defended and engaged with individuals exhibiting extremist anti-Muslim behaviour to classify others as extremists without consistency, it is simply unacceptable.

Setting aside hypocrisy, targeting Muslim organisations addressing Islamophobia is unwarranted.

Under this new definition, would Michael Gove be recommending Sir Paul Marshall, the owner of GB News, be defined as an extremist after a Hope not Hate investigation linked him to offensive tweets?

I doubt it, given Gove defended Marshall in the House of Commons. 

The rules are unclear, and I fear that, for the wider Muslim community and for organisations like ours, this new definition will only continue to do more harm than good.

Tackling extremism requires leadership. It requires real meaningful consultation and dialogue.

Instead, what we have is a slippery path towards curtailing the very values the definition professes to defend.

Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing Ross.Mccafferty@metro.co.uk. 

Share your views in the comments below.