Leicester review: Lord Austin’s appointment reinforces UK government's institutional Islamophobia

The appointment of Lord Austin to review the unrest that took place in Leicester in 2022 highlights once again the UK government’s institutional Islamophobia, and that they have a disinterest in taking the rise of violent Hindu nationalism in the UK seriously.

Last year, Leicester witnessed unrest following a cricket match between India and Pakistan which spiralled as extremist Hindutva supporters attacked an individual thought to be a Muslim. It was reported that some Hindus close to Indian prime minister Narendra Modi’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), a right-wing nationalist party, imported the violence to confront Muslims.

The racist unrest led Sir Peter Soulsby, the local mayor, to appoint Dr Chris Allen, a ‘Hate Crime’ specialist from Leicester University, for an independent review. However, within weeks, Allen withdrew after opposition was raised from Hindu groups. The Conservative government stepped in, with Communities Secretary Michael Gove taking charge. Recently, Gove commissioned an inquiry under the chairmanship of Lord Ian Austin. 

''There is clearly a governmental failure to treat Muslims on par with other citizens. Just take the fact that the Conservatives failed to carry out an independent review into Islamophobia within the party following a complaint from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). MCB submitted details of over 300 cases, that included MPs, councillors and MEPs to the Conservative Party.''

However, over 100 Muslim organisations and individuals from Leicester and some local councillors have objected to the appointment of Lord Austin, stating they will not engage in the review process due to Lord Austin’s record in public office. 

For example, Lord Austin was found guilty of falsifying statements and was forced to apologise and pay an undisclosed amount to Friends of Al-Aqsa, a Leicester based Palestinian campaign group, for the unfounded allegations that they were holocaust deniers. Furthermore, a former Jeremy Corbyn aide, Laura Murray received £40,000 in damages from the Telegraph for ‘untrue comments’ made in an article by Ian Austin in which he claimed she was ‘anti-Jewish racist’.

The Labour Muslim Network has also previously accused him of Islamophobia. In short, Lord Austin falls short of the Principles of Standards in Public Life which are ethical standards that those in public office are expected to uphold, and fails to meet the government’s own standard of a reviewer ‘to be impartial’. 

Besides this important fact, there are other concerning issues. First, Gove from the Conservative Party and Lord Austin, formerly of the Labour Party, find common ground in championing Israel and are both allied to various Friends of Israel groups. This is particularly worrying because of the close ties that exist between Israel and the Modi India – both accused of stocking up Islamophobia for political purposes. As it stands, Islamophobia has become practically mainstream in India where Muslims have been witness to violence, systematic discrimination and abuse. This is the hate that was said to have spilled over onto the streets of Leicester by supporters of Modi’s ideologies.

Similarly, pro-Israeli groups have been flagged for their promotion of anti-Muslim sentiments.The Israeli-India alliance, as I have here argued previously, has seen the sharing of racist, violent practices and a recipe for the global expansion of Islamophobia.

Indeed, the appointment of Lord Austin by Gove, described as “the unsung commander-in-chief” of the Islamophobes inside the Conservative party, raises the spectre of institutional Islamophobia. 

Institutional racism, as defined by William Macpherson who conducted a public inquiry into the death of Stephen Lawrence’s murder, is “processes, attitudes and behaviour which amount to discrimination through unwitting prejudice, ignorance, thoughtlessness and racist stereotyping which disadvantages minority ethnic people”.

Institutional Islamophobia in the Conservatives, the leading political party, is in the clear patterns of differential approaches meted out on a systematic basis against Muslims. There is clearly a governmental failure to treat Muslims on par with other citizens. Just take the fact that the Conservatives failed to carry out an independent review into Islamophobia within the party following a complaint from the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB). MCB submitted details of over 300 cases, that included MPs, councillors and MEPs to the Conservative Party.

Instead, the evidence of Islamophobia resulted in a watered-down report in 2018. The Singh report failed to account the widespread Islamophobia and certainly did not put in place measures to adequately counter it. Perhaps this is not surprising as the group Hope not Hate found that 57% of Conservative Party members had a negative attitude towards Muslims and half of their members (47%) believe Islam is ‘a threat to the British way of life’.

The Conservative Party, the serving government, has also failed to adopt the All Party Parliamentary Group definition of Islamophobia. This has disadvantaged Muslims in many ways, including for the purposes of monitoring, recording and policing Islamophobia in the UK. 

Finally, even Muslim members within the party have suffered. Take the case of Nusrat Ghani who said that her ‘Muslimness’ made her conservative colleagues uncomfortable and became a cause for losing her ministerial job. 

The result of an institutional culture of Islamophobia within the current government has resulted in Muslims being criminalised and rarely seen as victims of crime, let alone sympathised with. Worse, in the current environment that has been crated, attacking Muslimness is seen as a badge of honour and a way of climbing the political ladder.

For Gove and Lord Austin to be allowed to review any issues involving Muslims shows the proverbial two fingers to impartiality, undermines standards in public life and is the normalisation of institutional Islamophobia. Under the circumstances, an inquiry headed by Lord Austin undermines democratic principle of equity and cannot have any validity.

Ismail Patel is the author of “The Muslim Problem: From the British Empire to Islamophobia”. He is also Visiting Research Fellow at the University of Leeds and the Chair of the UK based NGO Friends of Al-Aqsa.

Follow him on Twitter: @IsmailAdamPatel

Have questions or comments? Email us at: editorial-english@newarab.com.

Opinions expressed in this article remain those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of The New Arab, its editorial board or staff.