Government’s new extremism definition will ‘vilify the fallacious folks’, warn Muslim organisations

The authorities’s proposal to redefine extremism will “vilify the wrong people” and “risk more division”, in response to a coalition of Muslim organisations.

Signatories embrace teams which worry they might fall underneath the brand new definition, which is because of be introduced as a part of the federal government’s new counter-extremism technique on Thursday.

CAGE International, Friends of Al-Aqsa (FOA), Muslim Association of Britain (MAB), Muslim Engagement and Development (MEND), and 5Pillars say “the proposed definition signals an attack on civil liberties by attacking law-abiding individuals and groups that oppose government policy by labelling them as ‘extremist'”.

A spokesperson for the coalition added: “This new extremism definition is a solution looking for a problem.

“It assaults one of many cherished cornerstones of our pluralistic democracy – that of free speech.

“Anyone, regardless of faith or political colour should be free to criticise the government of the day without being labelled as ‘extremist'”.

This follows warnings by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, that the proposals threat “disproportionately targeting Muslim communities”.

Sky News additionally spoke to Shakeel Afsar, a vocal protester who has led pro-Palestinian demonstrations by means of the streets of Birmingham.

Mr Afsar informed Sky News: “This is simply being handed to silence us and to place a zipper on our mouth and say what you might be saying isn’t acceptable, it will not be entertained, and that is fallacious.

“This is not the democratic country that I grew up in. As far as I was aware, we had a right to speak.

“And what I’m saying isn’t my view. You may take a stroll down streets in lots of areas and each single factor that we’ve got mentioned and executed is agreed by many, many hundreds of British residents.”

Mr Afsar made headlines five years ago when a protest exclusion zone was set up around a Birmingham primary school after he led a campaign against the inclusion of LGBT literature.

He’s more recently re-emerged organising pro-Palestinian marches.

In one video, he tells the crowd: “The native police have launched a press release saying we can’t say ‘from the river to the ocean,’ so what do we are saying…”

The crowd chants back: “From the river to the ocean, Palestine will probably be free.”

He says he does not support what Hamas did on 7 October last year. However, his views and actions might still be considered extremist.

In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph, Communities Secretary Michael Gove said “once you’re saying ‘from the river to the ocean’, you are explicitly saying, ‘I need to see the top of Israel as a Jewish State’.”

Responding, Mr Afsar mentioned: “I want to see the end of the occupying force that is forcefully occupying Palestine.

“And I need to see the British institution help the precise of the Palestinians to arm themselves and defend themselves towards the oppressors.”

He denies that this means the annihilation of Israel, but rather that they create “a democratic nation, the place all of them dwell peacefully”.

Mr Gove said pro-Palestinian events “have been organised by extremist organisations”.

And it is going to be one of many challenges of this definition to resolve who falls underneath it.

The present definition defines extremism as “vocal or active opposition to British values”.

However, Sky News understands the up to date definition goes to incorporate the “promotion or advancement of ideology based on hatred, intolerance or violence or undermining or overturning the rights or freedoms of others, or of undermining democracy itself”.

Read extra from Sky News:
Diane Abbott slams Speaker for not calling her to talk on race row
Foreign governments face ban on owning British newspapers

Dr Alan Mendoza, from the Henry Jackson Society, informed Sky News: “This definition does not ban extremism.

“What it bans is the federal government giving cash or platforms to extremists.

“You can still have freedom of thought on this basis, but I think what is quite clear is we don’t want extremist groups to be empowered by government – we want them as far away in the margins of life as possible.”

But one group which fears it is going to be banned is MEND.

It opposed the federal government’s anti-radicalisation programme Prevent and accused them of Islamophobia. It additionally helps practice establishments about Islamophobia.

Abdullah Saif, who represents the group in Birmingham, mentioned: “People who engage with the Muslim community, whether it be in the hospital or the police or any other organisations, universities, they reach out to us saying, listen, you have some really good material and we’d like you to train our staff, to talk to us about these issues.

“If it does certainly come about that we’re all placed on some type of record, [it] is to type of stifle that type of dialog.

“I think it’s an old tactic really, that if someone is against you, then you just put this label on them and then you don’t have to engage with them.”

The authorities says it is making an attempt to establish all types of extremism, together with far-right teams. But many Muslims worry this may disproportionately have an effect on them.