LONDON: The row between the UK government and the country’s biggest Muslim organization has intensified after the British home secretary said the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) did not represent Muslims in the UK.
The MCB last week called for an independent inquiry into alleged Islamophobia within the ruling Conservative Party, claiming that verbal attacks on Muslims were occurring “more than weekly” and listing a number of such attacks by Conservatives from the past two months.
But Home Secretary (interior minister) Sajid Javid has hit back, saying the government has no dealings with the MCB because some of its members express “unacceptable” views on extremism.
Appearing on the BBC’s Andrew Marr weekly politics show, Javid said: “The Muslim Council of Britain does not represent Muslims in this country. You find me a group of Muslims that thinks they’re represented by the MCB. I would be suspicious of anything that they’ve got to say, not least because under the last Labour government and a policy continued by us, we don’t deal with the MCB because too many of their members have had, you know, comments on extremists and that’s not acceptable.”
But the MCB’s secretary-general, Harun Khan, said the home secretary’s response showed the British government’s unwillingness to confront the issue.
“If the response is to instead attack the Muslim Council of Britain, it sadly indicates that the [Conservative] party has no interest in dealing with this matter with the seriousness it deserves.
“We have long spoken out and proactively challenged terrorism and extremism, as have British Muslims across the country.”
The MCB is an umbrella group which says it represents around 500 smaller organizations in the UK, including schools and mosques.
British minister hits back at ‘unacceptable’ Muslim council
British minister hits back at ‘unacceptable’ Muslim council
- The MCB is an umbrella group which says it represents around 500 smaller organizations in the UK
- “The Muslim Council of Britain does not represent Muslims in this country
Related
Top UN court to hear Rohingya genocide case against Myanmar
THE HAGUE: Did Myanmar commit genocide against its Rohingya Muslim minority? That’s what judges at the International Court of Justice will weigh during three weeks of hearings starting Monday.
The Gambia brought the case accusing Myanmar of breaching the 1948 Genocide Convention during a crackdown in 2017.
Legal experts are watching closely as it could give clues for how the court will handle similar accusations against Israel over its military campaign in Gaza, a case brought to the ICJ by South Africa.
Hundreds of thousands of Rohingya Muslims fled violence by the Myanmar army and Buddhist militias, escaping to neighboring Bangladesh and bringing harrowing accounts of mass rape, arson and murder.
Today, 1.17 million Rohingya live crammed into dilapidated camps spread over 8,000 acres in Cox’s Bazar in Bangladesh.
From there, mother-of-two Janifa Begum told AFP: “I want to see whether the suffering we endured is reflected during the hearing.”
“We want justice and peace,” said the 37-year-old.
’Senseless killings’
The Gambia, a Muslim-majority country in West Africa, brought the case in 2019 to the ICJ, which rules in disputes between states.
Under the Genocide Convention, any country can file a case at the ICJ against any other it believes is in breach of the treaty.
In December 2019, lawyers for the African nation presented evidence of what they said were “senseless killings... acts of barbarity that continue to shock our collective conscience.”
In a landmark moment at the Peace Palace courthouse in The Hague, Nobel Peace laureate Aung San Suu Kyi appeared herself to defend her country.
She dismissed Banjul’s argument as a “misleading and incomplete factual picture” of what she said was an “internal armed conflict.”
The former democracy icon warned that the genocide case at the ICJ risked reigniting the crisis, which she said was a response to attacks by Rohingya militants.
Myanmar has always maintained the crackdown by its armed forces, known as the Tatmadaw, was justified to root out Rohingya insurgents after a series of attacks left a dozen security personnel dead.
‘Physical destruction’
The ICJ initially sided with The Gambia, which had asked judges for “provisional measures” to halt the violence while the case was being considered.
The court in 2020 said Myanmar must take “all measures within its power” to halt any acts prohibited in the 1948 UN Genocide Convention.
These acts included “killing members of the group” and “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part.”
The United States officially declared that the violence amounted to genocide in 2022, three years after a UN team said Myanmar harbored “genocidal intent” toward the Rohingya.
The hearings, which wrap up on January 30, represent the heart of the case.
The court had already thrown out a 2022 Myanmar challenge to its jurisdiction, so judges believe they have the power to rule on the genocide issue.
A final decision could take months or even years and while the ICJ has no means of enforcing its decisions, a ruling in favor of The Gambia would heap more political pressure on Myanmar.
Suu Kyi will not be revisiting the Peace Palace. She has been detained since a 2021 coup, on charges rights groups say were politically motivated.
The ICJ is not the only court looking into possible genocide against the Rohingya.
The International Criminal Court, also based in The Hague, is investigating military chief Min Aung Hlaing for suspected crimes against humanity.
Another case is being heard in Argentina under the principle of universal jurisdiction, the idea that some crimes are so heinous they can be heard in any court.
