On 25 February, The Times published an article in which it promoted the claim that Muslim groups, including IHRC, are using Islamophobia as a tool to silence critics of so-called “grooming gangs”.
Below we reproduce its disingenuous request for comment and our response.
From: Witherow, Tom
Sent: Tuesday, February 25, 2025 20:14
To: Islamic Human Rights Commission <info@ihrc.org>
Subject: The Times – urgent request for comment
Good evening,
I’m getting in touch about a story which will appear on the Times website. It will report from a think tank report which says that some groups are using claims of islamophobia to suppress genuine commentary about grooming gangs in the UK. Their report, which is published tonight, names the IHRC and its annual Islamophobe of the year award. In particular, the shortlisting of Sarah champion MP and Dame Louise Casey in 2017 and 2018. Would you like to comment?
We write in response to your request for comment in relation to the following article:
We note that the request was sent at 8:14 PM, yet the article was published by 10:00 PM, less than two hours later. It is unreasonable to expect any organisation to respond so quickly late in the evening and demonstrates the insincerity of your request. It also exposes the misleading nature of the claim in the article that the “Islamic Human Rights Commission have been contacted for comment”—when, in reality, there was no genuine opportunity for us to respond meaningfully before publication.
From the framing of your question, it appears that the think tank itself is suppressing genuine commentary about racism—including Islamophobia—by resorting to racist tropes such as so-called “grooming gangs.” These tropes do nothing but fuel bigotry and distract from serious discussion on issues of racism and hate in our society.
Anti-Muslim hatred is a very real and documented problem. Darren Osborne’s attack on Finsbury Park Mosque, the murder of 81-year-old Muhsin Ahmed, and the murder of 82-year-old Mohammed Saleem are stark reminders that anti-Muslim hatred can and does lead to violent outcomes. This is part of the lived reality of many Muslims in the UK.
Likewise, challenging the bigotry of individuals like Tommy Robinson or Paul Golding has never been about limiting free speech. Their rhetoric incites hatred and violence, as witnessed during the 2024 summer riots across the UK and the role played by inflammatory social media posts. Calling out such incitement is a matter of public safety, not censorship.
The complaint of this think tank can be summarised as follows: “We no longer get to demonise Muslims with a free hand—for example writing false stories, such as Andrew Norfolk’s piece in The Times about a Christian foster child being forced to live with a Muslim family—without being challenged on our inaccuracies and our anti-Muslim animus.”
We assume that part of what is motivating this think tank is a “slippery slope” argument: if Muslims “grow a spine” and challenge bigotry, might other minorities also feel empowered to speak out against hatred and injustice, rather than remaining silent? This is not an unfounded fear on the part of bigots and media outlets like The Times. If multiple communities begin to push back against prejudice, it reduces the public space in which such bigotry and hatred can comfortably exist. Therefore, your reporting this story is not merely about one community, but about maintaining a broader environment that normalises hatred against any and all marginalised groups.
If anything, this article indicates the think tank’s frustration with Muslims who wish to hold accountable those who demonise them. Rather than engaging with legitimate concerns about anti-Muslim bigotry, they appear more concerned that their ability to spread misinformation and dehumanising narratives is being challenged. This is not about free speech; it is about maintaining an unchecked space for Islamophobia and other forms of prejudice to thrive.
As a matter of policy, IHRC publishes all media correspondence in full. This ensures there is an accurate public record of the exchange, should our comments be misquoted or omitted entirely.
Regards
IHRC Media
