Search
SearchToday in Islamophobia: In India, Nitish Kumar, chief minister of the eastern state of Bihar, found himself at the center of a political storm after he yanked of a Muslim women’s hijab during a public event, meanwhile in the United States, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has sued Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis over his order designating it and another organization as a “foreign terrorist organization,” saying the directive was unconstitutional, and in Denmark, the government said it plans to extend its existing ban on full-face veils in public spaces to schools and universities. Our recommended read of the day is by Saman Javed for Hyphen on the UK’s attempt to “codify a problem that some call anti-Muslim racism or anti-Muslim hatred” without using the word Islamophobia. This and more below:
United Kingdom
Can the UK really define Islamophobia without using the word Islamophobia? | Recommended Read
What is Islamophobia? That question has vexed parliamentarians for the best part of a decade — and the government is finally said to be on the verge of adopting a formal definition. But the road to that definition has been tortuous. At least one form of words, proposed in 2019 by an all-party parliamentary group, has been scrapped. An influential rightwing thinktank has long opposed efforts to define it at all. And now the definition is expected to omit the word “Islamophobia” altogether. Here’s what you need to know about the definition — what experts say about it, and what it means for UK Muslims. read the complete article
Keir Starmer is going to make British Muslims like me less safe
When I read that the government looks set to drop the word ‘Islamophobia’, in favour of the phrase ‘anti-Muslim hostility’, my first reaction wasn’t shock or confusion – it was a sinking feeling of utter resignation. In recent years we have seen Islamophobia (yes, I will still call it that) parroted by certain politicians, peddled in sections of the media and woven into policy. And ministers now appear to accept the argument that the term potentially risks curbing free speech. But considering the far-right riots, flag-painting hordes and normalisation of anti-migrant sentiment that we have seen in recent months, for many Muslims like me, it feels like a formal definition is needed now more than ever. So it hurts that the support and advocacy that Labour appeared to have extended to British Muslims when they were in opposition has all but dissipated now that they are in power. The preferred term, ‘Anti-Muslim hostility’ is defined as ‘engaging in or encouraging criminal acts, including acts of violence, vandalism of property, and harassment and intimidation whether physical, verbal, written or electronically communicated, which is directed at Muslims or those perceived to be Muslims because of their religion, ethnicity or appearance.’ Supporters of it posit that the new definition is far more comprehensive than previous iterations, but to me, this new term, and therefore the refusal to specifically entrench the word Islamophobia in law – as well as in the public consciousness – seems like a nefarious attempt to deliberately downplay the pervasive harm done to Muslims. read the complete article
For many British Muslims, the UK has become a hostile home
Fast forward a decade, and by 2010, successive updates to terrorism legislation had enshrined into law restrictions on speech and expression, while expanding the security state’s reach in areas of surveillance and detention without charge. Notably, the 2010s were when we saw the emergence of mass citizenship-stripping, including on “public good” grounds - which, as a new report by the Runnymede Trust and Reprieve highlights, mainly affects Muslims of South Asian, Middle Eastern or North African descent. Though initially shocking, with time, the idea of citizenship-stripping became a normalised feature of the home secretary’s prerogative. The highest-profile cases have been the ones that the media and political establishments colluded to demonise in the public imagination, such as Abu Hamza al-Masri, and perhaps most prominently, Shamima Begum. Islamophobic tropes were used to portray both of these figures as monsters to the general public. They were caricatured on account of aspects of their visual appearance that were deemed unsavoury, threatening and alien. “Captain Hook” is how headlines portrayed Abu Hamza, and of course, Begum was adultified as a “jihadi bride” - a way of manufacturing public consent for draconian and authoritarian measures that would, in normal circumstances, have drawn incredulity for their erosion of the rule of law. Any and all Muslims caught up in the UK’s growing net of securitisation were now associated with these “monster” figures, and thus plausibly posed an ideological - nay, existential - threat that could be excluded if deemed appropriate by the state, leaving us with a two-tiered citizenship regime. read the complete article
United States
CAIR sues Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis over order designating it "foreign terrorist organization"
A leading Muslim civil rights group in the U.S. has sued Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis over his order designating it and another organization as a "foreign terrorist organization," saying the directive was unconstitutional. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, known as CAIR, has more than 20 chapters across the United States, and its work involves legal actions, advocacy and education outreach. The lawsuit was filed late Monday by the CAIR-Foundation and CAIR-Florida, its affiliate in the state. The suit asked a federal judge in Tallahassee to declare DeSantis' order unlawful and unconstitutional and prevent it from being enforced. "He has usurped the exclusive authority of the federal government to identify and designate terrorist organizations by baselessly declaring CAIR a terrorist organization," the lawsuit says. read the complete article
Lawsuit claims Loudon County woman forced to remove hijab for mugshot
A Loudon County woman is suing the sheriff and the county, claiming her religious rights were violated during booking. The lawsuit says deputies forced Hollie Zaki, an observant Muslim, to remove her hijab for a mugshot after her arrest in December 2024 and then posted that photo online. Her booking process was also video-recorded. Attorneys argue the action had no valid security reason and humiliated Zaki, whose faith requires her to keep her head covered in front of men. The suit added that male officers were present during her booking. The lawsuit claims that the forced removal of her hijab violated the federal Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act and Tennessee’s Preservation of Religious Freedom Act. read the complete article
Australia
What we know about Ahmed al-Ahmed, ‘hero’ who disarmed Bondi attacker
During the deadly shooting at Australia’s Bondi Beach in Sydney on Sunday, a bystander was filmed tackling and disarming one of the attackers. The man, identified as 43-year-old fruit-shop owner Ahmed al-Ahmed, has been hailed as a hero. On Tuesday, Anthony Albanese, Australia’s prime minister, said al-Ahmed’s actions were an example of “Australians coming together”. “Ahmed al-Ahmed … took the gun off that perpetrator at great risk to himself and suffered serious injury as a result of that, and is currently going through operations today in hospital,” Albanese said. This is what we know about al-Ahmed. read the complete article
India
Indian politician stuns onlookers and rights groups by yanking down Muslim woman’s hijab
A prominent Indian politician has kicked up a storm in the country by yanking off a Muslim woman’s hijab during a public event at his residence. Nitish Kumar, chief minister of the eastern state of Bihar, found himself at the centre of a political storm after the incident sparked widespread outrage. A video shows Mr Kumar seated on stage alongside deputy chief minister Samrat Choudhary and health minister Mangal Pandey as doctors are called up individually to take their letters. When Nusrat Parveen approaches to receive her appointment letter with her face covered by a hijab, Mr Kumar is heard saying: “What is this?” Moments later, he leans forward and pulls down her hijab. “This act was an assault on this woman’s dignity, autonomy, and identity. When a public official forcibly pulls down a woman’s hijab, it sends a message to the general public that this behaviour is acceptable. No one has the right to police a woman’s faith or clothing,” Aakar Patel, head of Amnesty International India, said in a statement. “Such actions deepen fear, normalise discrimination, and erode the very foundations of equality and freedom of religion. This violation demands unequivocal condemnation and accountability,” he added. read the complete article
Denmark
Denmark looks to expand ban on burqas, niqabs to schools, universities
Denmark’s government on Wednesday said it plans to extend its existing ban on full-face veils in public spaces to schools and universities. "Burqas, niqabs, or other clothing that hides people's faces have no place in a Danish classroom," Minister for Immigration and Integration Rasmus Stoklund said in a statement. "There is already a ban on face coverings in public spaces, and this should of course also apply in educational institutions," he added. In August 2018, Denmark banned the wearing full-face Islamic veils like the burqa and niqab in public places, with offenders subject to a fine. Human rights campaigners and religious groups have criticized the ban as discriminatory and as a violation of both freedom of religion and women's freedom of choice. read the complete article
Portugal
Why would Portugal ban burqas?
Before the far-right Chega Party moved to ban Muslim women from wearing face coverings, there was little discussion of burqas in Portugal. So it came as a shock to 31-year-old biology PhD student Zohra Lodhia when in October the party’s bill proposing the ban was passed by parliament. According to the last national census in 2021, there were just 36,000 Muslims living in Portugal. That number is likely to have increased significantly, but is still a small fraction of the 10.7 million population. “I can count with my fingers how many people wear the niqab. The burqa? I haven’t seen one,” Lodhia told Hyphen. A proposed ban on the public wearing of face coverings by Muslim women is now at a parliamentary committee stage. From there it will be passed on to the president who can either rubber-stamp the new law or refer it to a constitutional court. If it is ratified, fines of up to €4,000 may be imposed for the “the use of clothing intended to conceal or obstruct the display of the face in public spaces”. While promoting the bill, Chega’s divisive leader André Ventura invoked concerns over women’s rights and public safety — claims that have no credibility for Lodhia. From its launch in 2019, Chega (meaning enough) has risen from one seat in the national assembly to 60. Ventura, the party’s founder, is a former football pundit turned ideologically malleable rabble-rouser. While fond of provoking outrage with bouts of Islamophobia and racism, he also presents to voters as pragmatic and plain-spoken, concentrating most of his attacks on the mismanagement of the country by its two traditional main parties. In the process Chega has become the second largest group in parliament behind the centre-right Partido Social Democrata, which leads a minority government. read the complete article