report on Islamophobia In europe

Report written byelsa ray - Project manager& the IMan team :

samy debah - President of CCIFraouda ghenania - Co-creator of IMANETyoussef himmat - Communication Officer

najatte kaaoiss - Project Management OfficerIntissar kherigi - Human Rights Officer

Marwan Muhammad - Special Adviser to the OSCE on Combatting Intolerance Against Muslims (Former member of the IMAN core team)

Graphisme par spiral Multimédia

http://www.spiral-multimedia.fr

With the support of eu Fundamental rights & citizenship programme

The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not neces-sarily reflect those of the European Commission or any other party.

November 2014 © IMAN All rights reserved

2

Foreword by Marwan MuhaMMad

IntroductIon

IslaMophobIa, europe’s new specter

a european struggle

FroM observatIons to actIon: our recoMMendatIons

the IMan network ....................................................

Table of Contents

..................

................................................................

..............................................

.............................................

.........................................

page 3

page 5

page 7

page 22

page 27

page 30

2

Intolerance against Muslims is an issue of growing concerns across the OSCE region. Different political, social and ideological environments across participa-ting States result into different realities.

The same phenomenon, intolerance against Muslims, translates into different forms: from hate speech to hate crime, including a range of incidents, such as denial of service or even institutionalized discrimination, in some instances.

The ideological nature of this contemporary form of racism may change over time and space, but it causes the same harm to those who experience it. The othering of Muslims as a community, the stigmatization of human beings based on their religion harms them in various aspects and has different consequences, depending on the victim’s situation and on the context into which incidents occur.

How to assess the impact of intolerance against Muslims on communi-ties?

What sort of quantitative measures can account for the experience of the victims?

How can the data help us better understand the nature of the pheno-menon?

These are the most pressing questions raised when one considers the need for a strong statistical model, with the intention of providing reliable information to stakeholders, in order to address current forms of racism and intolerance.

We need to start from the victim’s perspective. This allows us to formulate a simple and yet essential question:

How does it feel and what is it like to be a Muslim, facing discrimination and hate crime?

This calls for a much more complex answer than just a series of number. This is why any comprehensive assessment of intolerance against Muslims (and similar-ly, of other forms of racism and intolerance) needs to combine both quantitative and qualitative evidence, in order to provide a richer, more detailed and nuanced account of the impact it has, both on individuals and communities.

A reliable data gathering model, in the field of hate crime and discrimination, is

3

Foreword by Marwan Muhammad

Special Adviser to the OSCE on Combatting Intolerance Against Muslims

4

able to provide a quantitative account of reported events, in the sense that a case of discrimination or a criminal offense need to actually occur, for the repor-ting sequence to be initiated (and then for the data to be compiled).

There are also cases where the data alone cannot tell the whole story.

For instance, we cannot put a number on the feeling of exclusion experienced by those who are most exposed to intolerance. We cannot quantify all the minor (and yet meaningful) incidents which, taken together, produce an un-eventful and yet devastating impact on the target groups, both socially and psychologi-cally, when racist narratives and stereotypes are interiorized.

Still, it remains absolutely essential to compile data, while remaining aware and cautious of its limitations, for at least three important reasons:

1) It provides a framework for victims to come forward and for their experiences to be acknowledged. Reporting is the first step to justice, and it provides the opportunity for NGOs and law enforcement officers to legally qualify the nature of the incident, investigate the case and provide the most appropriate response, depending on the case.

2) It provides stakeholders and policy makers with data, in order for them to better understand the nature and the dynamics of the pheno-menon, and then take action to address it. For all its limitations, data remains the starting point of any high level policy making, in the field of hate crime and discrimination

3) It breaks the othering process, by showing that we collectively care about the victims and acknowledge the reality they go through. This is an important step in addressing the deeper, more social and psycholo-gical consequences of racism and intolerance.

This is why we support efforts made, both by participating States and Civil So-ciety Organizations, in order to better monitor hate crime and discrimination, and ultimately address contemporary forms of racism and intolerance more ef-ficiently.

4 55

Islamophobia, that decade-old form of racism, is not a rare or isolated pheno-menon. It is common and widespread. It is a “trend” that has taken root in all sec-tors of our modern societies, insidiously upsetting their balance in the process.

Victims of Islamophobia report acts that affect all of their daily lives and concerns. They do not report “accidental” acts, such as could be attributed to chance or a bad encounter. Instead, they speak of often premeditated and always violent (symbolically or physically) recurring incidents.

so it is a widespread phenomenon that has reached europe. In 2011, thorbjørn Jagland, a norwegian politician and the secretary general of the council of eu-rope, called Islamophobia “the new specter of europe”.

It took many years and increasing numbers of incidents for Islamophobia to final-ly be recognized for what it sadly is and for European authorities to start conser-vatively taking an interest in the issue. However, the road ahead is still long.

the IMan1 (Islamophobia Monitoring and Action Network)) project, thanks to which we are writing this report, has focused on 8 European countries: France, Belgium, Germany, Hungary, Sweden, Holland, Italy and the United Kingdom.

In these eight countries, grassroots organizations fighting against racism and Is-lamophobia have studied this social phenomenon up close, in particular through their work with victims.

Spearheaded by the FEMYSO2 (Forum of Young and Student Muslim Organiza-tions in Europe) and the CCIF3 (Collective Against Islamophobia in France), the IMAN project has received funding from the European Commission.

this is the first anti-Islamophobia pan-european project, initiated by civil society, to emerge and be supported by european authorities.

This report contains figures, information and analyses collected through the IMAN network, which is made up of more than fifteen grassroots organizations.It also contains information and analysis taken from various reports published in Europe that focus on Islamophobia.

1 - www.iman-project.org2 - www.femyso.org3 - www.islamophobie.net

Introduction

6

It is high time, in 2014, for a real effort to combat Islamophobia to emerge in Eu-rope, both in civil society and at the level of national and European institutions.

the IMan project spearheaded by the ccIF and the FeMyso

8 countries, 3 key activities

Gathering data on acts of Islamophobia

Intranet tool and data management

Support to victims

Practical and legal tools

Training

Victims, professionals, organizations

6 7

1. the stIgMatIZatIon oF MuslIMs: the eMergence oF a new scapegoat

some fifteen organizations, some forty field workers, 8 European countries, and a common concern: “Muslims” have become the scapegoats of society, the prime suspects, and the first de facto victims of discrimination and hate crimes on the basis of religious affiliation, be it real or perceived.

In the Netherlands, as in many other European countries, September 11, 2001 was a catalyst for Islamophobia.

This was noted by EMCEMO, an organization based in Amsterdam.

The European Organization ENAR (European Network Against Racism) also notes in its Report on Islamophobia in the UK4 that “the terrorist attacks of Septem-ber 11 and July 7, 2005 in London served to fuel anti-Muslim sentiment in United Kingdom”.

Ever since the emergence of the “Islamic State” and the media coverage of its crimes, Islamophobia—particularly on the Internet—has also experienced an ex-tremely alarming increase.

At first glance, the international context plays a predominant role in Islamopho-bia and in the increase of Islamophobic acts. That is to say that as soon as a re-prehensible and murderous act is committed by an individual or group of indivi-duals in the name of Islam, the Muslim population throughout the world is seen as responsible, and therefore becomes targeted, abused and discriminated against.

In fact, the dominant discourse in European societies is to say that Islamopho-bia actually originated in the acts of violence committed by Muslim individuals around the world.

this stance inevitably puts Muslim citizens in a guilty position and implies they deserve the prejudice against them.

4 - Enar Shadow Report, 2011-2012. http://www.enar-eu.org/IMG/pdf/uk.pdf

Islamophobia, Europe’s New Specter

8 9

In reality, the work of grassroots organizations like MEND5 – a London association specializing in the fight against Islamophobia that does a remarkable job analy-zing the phenomenon in terms of politics and the media—highlights the fact that acts of violence committed “in the name of Islam” are used to systematically jus-tify a structural Islamophobia predating such events.

Europe has gone from an anti-immigrant form of racism (namely against non-Eu-ropean immigrants from Asia, North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa) from the 60s to the 90s, to racism on the basis of religious affiliation, i.e. Islamophobia.

Yesterday’s “filthy Arab” has become today’s “filthy Muslim”.

In 2011, Europol sounded the alarm in its report on terrorism in Europe6 by poin-ting out that:“If unrest in the Arab world (...) leads to a large influx of immigrants in Europe, extremism and far-right terrorism could experience a renewal of energy by using the public’s apprehension vis-à-vis immigrants from Muslim countries in Europe.”

In the same report, Europol also went on to state that “the vast majority of at-tacks in Europe in 2010 were the work of separatist groups, and the most deadly attacks were committed by anarchists and far-left groups.”7

There were 249 such attacks in 2010. Attacks committed by people aligned with the Islamic faith numbered 3 that same year.

Terrorist acts committed by Muslims represent 1% of all terrorist acts in Europe. Yet they take up 100% of media coverage.

The responsibility of the media and of the member States no longer need to be proven when it comes to their role in creating and spreading these prejudices, which have dire consequences on the daily lives of Muslims, as we shall see in this report.

5 - http://iengage.uk.net/6 - “EU terrorism situation and trend report”, Europol 2011. https://www.europol.europa.eu/sites/de-fault/files/publications/te-sat2011_0.pdf7 - 20 Minutes.fr, 26/07/2011, “Les vrais chiffres du terrorisme en Europe, bien loin des perceptions” (The real Figures of Terrorism in Europe, Far Different Than What Is Generally Perceived) http://www.20minutes.fr/monde/762668-20110726-vrais-chiffres-terrorisme-europe-bien-loin-perceptions

8 9

two critical phenomena need to be stressed.

First, legislation (regardless of which political party has the majority in the as-sembly voting bills into law) tends to introduce emergency laws that restrict the freedoms of Muslim citizens, on the basis of safety or the principle of “neutrality”.

The security measures taken around Muslims leads people to perceive them as a threat to national security that is similar to the post 9/11 era.8

These include the law prohibiting one from concealing one’s face in the public space (Act of October 11, 2010 in France, called “law against the full veil”), which had a considerable impact on French public opinion (with the French associating the veil—full or not—with an issue of safety and of violation of freedom). Simi-larly, there are those laws called “anti-terrorism” that primarily target Muslims (especially men) and that have an impact on the freedom of movement and the protection of personal information.

Second, there is the image of Muslims in the media, and especially veiled Muslim women, which is appalling most of the time. As soon as talk turns to Islam and Muslims, speech becomes considerably more liberated and unrestricted by any limits, not even the most basic respect for hu-man beings. The worst prejudices are spread without any argument against them being made, and alarming remarks about Muslims—presenting them as invaders, dangers to national security and to Europe—are rehashed over and over again.

The confiscation of the Muslims’ voice in their plurality, and the syste-matic, almost commonplace stigmatization they suffer, represent the

clearest evidence of the construction of this scapegoat.

8 - Professor Talip Kucukcan, Personal Representative of the OSCE – Chairperson In Office On Com-bating Discriminations and intolerance against Muslims, HDIM 2014, September 30, Warsawhttp://www.osce.org/odihr/124657?download=true

10 11

2. IslaMophobIa: words and deeds

2.1 stigmatizing discourse, hate speech

Islamophobia is first expressed through hate speech or discourse stigmati-zing Muslims that encourage discrimination and violence in the field. In ten years of fieldwork with victims, the CCIF (Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France / Collective Against Islamophobia in France)9 noted a clear correlation between hostile speech or hate speech against Muslims voices by the French intelligentsia and disseminated by the media, and the transition from word to deed in the field.

This observation is shared by all the organizations fighting against Islamophobia and is all the more alarming given that it denotes a normalization of Islamopho-bic rhetoric.

“Over the past decade, Islamophobia has increased in the Netherlands. This phe-nomenon manifests itself through violent incidents against mosques or indivi-duals, the negative perception of Muslims and Islam in the media, and increasing support of extreme-right parties,” notes Amsterdam-based organization EMCE-MO.

In 2014 local elections, the leader of the far-right party, Geert Wilders, with a crowd of supporters behind him, sang that he wanted “Less! Less! Less!” Moroc-cans in Holland. This followed hate speech against Muslims in Holland, whom he considers de facto as “foreigners”.

EMCEMO also notes that the online platform to report hate speech on the Internet (MDI) received 1,013 reports alleging hate speech against Muslims between 2010 and 2013.

In France, intellectuals and politicians of all stripes appear on public channels to talk about the “Islam problem,” the “radicalization of Muslims,” thus presenting citizens of the Muslim faith as suspects or individuals that keep the Republic from thriving.

So much so that the CCIF made an infographic to identify hate and stigmatizing speech against Muslims from elected officials in France.10

Au niveu européen, l

9 - Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France, Rapport annuel 2013. http://www.islamophobie.net/rapport-annuel10 - CCIF – « Le cercle des élus déchus de la République » http://politiques.islamophobie.net

10 11

At the European level, the Council of Europe launched the “No Hate Speech Movement”11 campaign, spearheaded by young Europeans aiming to bring awareness to hate speech on the Internet in order

to diminish its impact.

On the Internet in general, and particularly on social network sites, screen pages fill with hateful remarks without any effective barrier in place that can stop them: hateful Facebook pages such as «Islam is shit,» which calls for the murder of Mus-lims, Twitter accounts peppered with images and hate speech against Muslims, blogs calling for violence against veiled women, etc.

While anti-Semitic remarks are taken, and rightly so, very seriously and are severely forbidden, it is not the same for Islamophobic remarks,

even though they spread a deadly poison into society.

recommendationAdopt a legal and police procedure to contain hateful content on the Internet, in ways similar to the very effective procedures that exist to curb pedophilia on the Internet.

2.2 Islamophobia In everyday life

beyond words, Islamophobia materializes through actions that are some-times violent and that often occur on a daily basis.

First, there are the acts of discrimination.

Already, in 2009, the report of the European agency FRA—Fundamental Rights Agency— warned about the scale of discrimination against Muslims in Europe. “On average, one Muslim respondent out of three reported having experienced discrimination in the last 12 months. These respondents (...) said they had ex-perienced an average of eight incidents of discrimination over a period of 12 months”.12

11 - http://www.nohatespeechmovement.org12 - Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA), Rapport 2009 http://fra.europa.eu/sites/default/files/fra_uploads/448-EU-MIDIS_MUSLIMS_FR.pdf

12 13

In Belgium, the Centre for Equal Opportunities and the Fight against Racism13 re-ported a significant increase in religious discrimination between 2011 and 2013, recording 257 cases for the year 2013. They also claim, based on their records, that 80% of the cases relating to discrimination are Islamophobic discrimination (based on the victim’s religious beliefs).

In Germany, organizations fighting against discrimination and racism, such as Inssan14 report increasing discrimination against Muslim citizens.

discrimination on a daily basis

13 - http://www.diversite.be

14 - http://www.inssan.de

access to education

• Wearing religious signs is forbidden (France, Belgium, Italy)• Harassment or exclusion of young girls on the basis of their attire•Veiled mothers are excluded from their children’s school life• Meat (and sometimes pork) is imposed on all children without taking into ac-count the parents’ educational wishes• Inappropriate comments by teachers• Islamophobic content in certain school textbooks (depicting Muslims as chau-vinist and violent barbarians)

access to the job market

• Hiring discrimination (color of skin + gender + religious beliefs)• Enormous challenges to face in order to obtain a position commensurate with the applicant’s skills• Wearing religious signs is subject to unjustified ban• Mental harassment of Muslim em-ployees • Transfer requests denied• Insults and mockery in the workplace

12 13

then, physical and verbal abuse against Muslims, and especially against women, has been on the rise in recent years.

Insults in the street, shoving, and physical abuse are common in Europe. There is also an increasing number of attacks on mosques and Muslim institutions (ceme-teries, schools, etc.).

access to health care

• Treatment denied by certain physi-cians• Patient forced to remove headscarf even for a medical visit that does not require it• Violation of the medical code of ethics on the part of a physician with respect to his/her patient (inappropriate com-ments on the patient’s religious beliefs)

access to recreational activities

• Illegal company rules forbidding pa-trons from wearing religious signs• Access denied by a recreational faci-lity on the basis of a patron’s physical appearance (beard, jilbabs and abayas, veil, djellaba, etc)

access to public services

• Access to a city hall or state structure denied on the basis that the person is wearing a headscarf• Non-justified administrative difficulty in obtaining basic documents (personal identification documents, official state-ments, marriage certificates, etc.)

service denied

• Service denied in a restaurant on the basis of a patron’s religious beliefs• Vacation rental denied on the basis of a patron’s religious beliefs• Service denied in a store on the basis of the patron’s clothing (headscarf, jil-bab, niqab, etc.)

Freedom of worship hindered

• The construction (or availability) of a mosque is hindered• Opening of private Muslim schools hindered

14 15

overview of violent Islamophobia in europe

15 - MEND, anciennement iENGAGE, membre du réseau IMAN. http://iengage.uk.net

France

• 28 violent physical assaults against Muslim women in 2013• A pregnant young women lost her baby after being assaulted (Argenteuil, 2013)• 9 violent physical assaults against Muslim women (and one man) over the summer of 2014 • On average, one mosque is vanda-lized every week

belgium• 2 violent physical assaults against women wearing the headscarf for the months of September and October 2014

sweden

• A violent physical assault against a Muslim woman and her daughter in the south of Sweden in 2012• A woman was assaulted at a bus shel-ter in 2013• 237 reports recorded by the Internet website “Hatbrott.se” in 2013, which tracks hate crimes against Muslims (in-sults and blows) • “Hatbrott.se” has observed that at least 40% of Muslim places of worship have been attacked in Sweden

united kingdom

• Hate crimes of a religious nature have increased by 45% between 2013 and 2014 according to the MEND organiza-tion15

• 25% of all hate crimes committed against Muslims are physical attacks (MEND)• A young woman from Somalia wea-ring the headscarf was brutally murde-red on her way to the university (Essex) in June of 2014

14 15

16 - Organisation of Muslims in Hungary, membre du réseau IMAN, Budapest. http://iszlam.com

germany

• Marwa El Sherbini, a veiled 33 year-old woman, was stabbed to death in a Court of Appeals in 2009. “The country’s first instance of Islamophobic crime.”• Violence against young Turks by law enforcement forces during Ramadan in 2013• An increase in violence against Muslim communities

Italy

• No exact figures on assaults but many reports of insults and shoving• Women report being spat on and ha-ving their veils ripped off in the street• The construction of mosques is for-bidden or hindered

hungary

• No exact figures, but the Organiza-tion of Muslims in Hungary16 has repor-ted a significant increase in violence against Muslim property (homes, cars, mosques, etc.) in Hungary over the past few years. • Mosques are targeted for violence, such as on a Ramadan night in 2012, when all the cars parked in front of the mosque were set on fire.

the netherlands

• The Netherlands report more of an emphasis on violence against insti-tutions (mosques, schools, etc.) than against individuals.• In 2005, 135 mosques and 29 schools were the target of Islamophobic at-tacks.• In 2014, EmCeMo counted 5 serious incidents against mosques, including one planned by right-wing extremists against the Mosque of Ljmuiden, which was thwarted. • Particularly virulent verbal violence on the Internet

16 17

At this stage, we are still desperately short of figures as organizations fighting against Islamophobia are only just beginning to adopt a pace and an effective methodology for collecting reports of cases of Islamophobia and support for vic-tims.

But these two tables already provide a painful and disturbing overview of what the numbers will soon reveal.At the moment, all of this is actually just the tip of the iceberg.

2.3 women: Islamophobia and sexism

Islamophobia is definitely a specific form of racism that targets people’s reli-gious beliefs.

but it is also a form of sexism, in that it mainly targets women.

In a large portion of the incidents, Muslim women are specifically targeted and excluded from work, education or public services17

In France, the CCIF reports each year that 70 to 80% of Islamophobia victims are women. And this trend is observed across Europe.

Women are targets because they are women and because their outfits and fashion choices upset people. Muslim women wearing headscarves thus find themselves the preferred target for attackers and people with prejudice.

17 - Professor Talip Kucukcan, Personal Representative of the OSCE – Chairperson In Office On Com-bating Discriminations and intolerance against Muslims, HDIM 2014, September 30, Warsawhttp://www.osce.org/odihr/124657?download=true

belgium

A vast majority (71%) of the reports col-lected come from women, regardless of the activity sector, as noted by the Centre pour l’égalité des chances et la lutte contre le racisme (Center for Equal Opportunity and the Fight Against Ra-cism). Wearing the headscarf is a ma-jor discrimination factor in Belgium, es-pecially in the fields of education and professional training.

16 17

It is very interesting to observe that women are victims of Islamophobia in 3 dif-ferent areas:

- Education- The workforce- Physical violence

In short, the three areas in which EU governments and institutions make it a point of honor to uphold gender equality and fight against

violence against women.

18 - Muslims for Peace and Justice (SMFR), Sweden. Member of the IMAN network.19 - Giovanni Musulmani d’Italia (GMI) member of the IMAN network http://www.giovanimusulmani.it/GMI

sweden

All victims of physical assault are wo-men. Women are also widely discri-minated against in the workforce, as noted by the organization Muslims for Peace and Justice18

Sources: Hatbrott.se, Organization Muslims for Peace and Justice

the netherlands

EmCeMo reports that women and young people in particular are bearing the brunt of Islamophobic discrimina-tion.

united kingdom

Women represent nearly all of the vic-tims of physical assault. They are discri-minated against more often than men, especially when trying to find work or receive professional training.

Italy

No exact figures, but organizations such as GMI19 report systematic stigmatiza-tion of women wearing the headscarf, who experience discrimination and ex-clusion frequently and in ways that are not justified.

France

Women represent 80% of the overall victims of Islamophobia and nearly all the victims of assault. They are victims of discrimination in all areas of eve-ryday life, but most notably in educa-tion and in the workforce.

18 19

How to explain, then, that Muslim women suffer precisely these very acts of vio-lence and discrimination? Other than by the fact that they are deliberately excluded from their campaigns for equal rights—even though these women represent an extremely wide range of society in terms of ethnicity, cultural and social background, age, occupation, skills, etc.

IIt should also be noted that the exclusion of Muslim women is always justified by the desire to “liberate” them from the “oppression” of which they are allegedly victims—ironic, given the fact that this desire for liberation is in fact a clumsy jus-tification for systematic exclusion.

2.4 structural Islamophobia

as we have seen, Islamophobia groups together a set of situations of exclu-sion, discrimination and violence. Especially against women.

The particularity and seriousness of Islamophobia also lies in the fact that it is structural, meaning that it comes from institutions and public services and that it proliferates there in the absence of measures to curb the phenomenon.

In France, CCIF figures show that almost 60% of discrimination cases occur in institutions (schools, public services, etc.).In Holland, EMCEMO observes that: “in a sense, Islamophobia is firmly tolerated by the government, which only sees it as a form of freedom of expression and completely denies the real problem,” hate speech against Muslims being at best ignored and at worst passed on.The ECRI (European Commission Against Racism and Intolerance)20 regrets that in Italy “Muslims continue to be stigmatized by discourse and policy proposals by certain parties.”In Germany, it appears that the headscarf is a real barrier to access to skilled jobs and education. Young women who wish to pursue their studies while adhe-ring to their personal beliefs and clothing choices face many obstacles in school and throughout their studies, even though the structures in question are public structures.

These facts confirm what we stated in the introduction.

Islamophobia is not the sum of unfortunate incidents that happen by chance and the ill will of a few bad seeds. This is truly structural racism

that governments try in vain to ignore.

20 - www.coe.int/ecri/fr(en)

18 19

3. responses FroM the polItIcal, MedIa, and JudIcIal realMs

If Islamophobia is spreading, or at least not retreating, this is partly explained by the fact that, not being officially recognized as a specific form of racism, no concrete action is being taken to stop it.

One of the biggest concerns of Muslims is increasing violence against individuals and institutions. Several structures in the regions covered by the OSCE continually report incidents against Muslims, with a wor-sening of the nature of the case, when some go from discrimination to

physical violence.21

The authorities provide no reassurance with respect to these concerns, since the acts of violence are not punished proportionally to the seriousness of the deeds.

a few examples

21 - Professor Talip Kucukcan, Personal Representative of the OSCE – Chairperson In Office On Com-bating Discriminations and intolerance against Muslims, HDIM 2014, September 30, Warsawhttp://www.osce.org/odihr/124657?download=true

France

A young pregnant woman was assaul-ted in Argenteuil (summer of 2013). Her aggressors beat her to a pulp, ripped off her veil and insulted her. She lost her baby a few days later.Hardly any media coverage. No reac-tion from politicians. The culprits were never found. VERSUSThe case of the “young woman on com-muter rail D” who, in 2004, claimed to have been assaulted by two young North Africans because she was Jewish, adding that they had drawn a swastika on her stomach.The incident caused a media and politi-cal frenzy and led to many arrests (the young woman ended up admitting that she had lied and made up the whole thing).

20 21

convictions of Islamophobic acts remain weak and not dissuasive. The victim’s statement is often questioned by the police then distorted by the media, creating the impression in the end that Muslims have a tendency to “exaggerate,” and that the Islamophobic nature of attacks and discrimination is ultimately just made up or an opportunity to “add fuel to the fire,” or even victimization behavior.

The non-recognition of the victims’ status (as victims of hate crime) and of the perpetrators’ motive of hate constitutes a denial of justice that on the one hand grants a kind of “license” to discriminate, physically harm or even kill to Islamo-phobes, who then feel invested with a “power” without limit; and on the other hand contributes to the climate of tension and division that exists in European societies.

Furthermore, the lack of response from elected officials and representatives of the state in the face of violent and increasingly frequent Islamophobic acts does indeed confer a sense of impunity and gives the impression that Muslims are les-ser citizens.

This encourages victims to remain silent and to not take any action. This is the trend observed by all the organizations fighting against discrimination and Isla-mophobia in Europe, on which we will expound in the second part of this report.

In the early 2000s, it became clear that Islamophobia was not just a local or na-tional problem. Very quickly, the scourge spread throughout Europe, thus expan-ding to a considerable scale.

France

A Muslim couple and their 3 year-old child (the woman was pregnant) were assaulted on a bus. The woman was as-saulted, the perpetrator pulled on the man’s beard. They are assailed with Islamophobic insults, in front of wit-nesses. The perpetrator appeared be-fore a judge right way, but the prose-cutor decided NOT to include the racist nature of the assault in the charges so as to not “add fuel to the fire”.

sweden

The man who violently assaulted a wo-man and her daughter in front of a hos-pital in the south of Sweden ended up being sentenced (after very lengthy proceedings) to 75 hours of community service.

20 21

Islamophobia is now the primary challenge in the fight against racism and hate crimes in Europe.

This is why cooperation between civil society—especially grassroots organiza-tions—and European authorities is crucial.

2322

Islamophobia is in fact a universal problem. It affects a multitude of indivi-duals and thus takes the form of an “umbrella attitude” that is made up of other types of prejudice and forms of exclusion as well.

It is is a clear violation of human rights and should, as such, be fought with greater force.

Being Muslim is to accumulate handicaps. For example, if you are a black woman, Muslim and veiled, you will be all the more discriminated against. If you’re an Arab and a Muslim man, same thing.Age, gender, ethnicity, place of residence, physical appearance: all these discri-minatory criteria can be found in Islamophobia.

This is why it must become the central concern of European bodies that aim to protect fundamental rights. by supporting civil society organizations undertaking real campaigns against Is-lamophobia, europe will then become a key player in the fight against racism at both the national and international levels.

1. grassroots organIZatIons and Methods oF actIon

the IMAN project was primarily intended to make up for a deficiency at the European level: we had no common dynamic in the fight against Islamophobia, as we were scattered geographically, strategically, and methodically.

IMAN has thus successfully made up for that deficiency, first by building a Euro-pean network of organizations fighting against racism, discrimination and Isla-mophobia. This network extends across 8 countries22 and includes over fifteen associations wishing to work together and share their practices to fight more effectively against Islamophobia, both at the national and European levels.

22 - See the list of member organizations in the appendix.

A European Struggle

2322

Second, IMAN introduced a common work methodology, designed to accomplish two main tasks :

- Data gathering - Support for victims

Indeed, the above were the other two major shortcomings: we didn’t have suffi-cient data on Islamophobia in Europe, let alone homogenized data, meaning data collected from a universal methodology that would allow for the production of accurate statistics on Islamophobic acts, victims and perpetrators. And we didn’t have effective structures, either, to help the victims of Islamophobia, who, as a result, were left to their own devices.

thus, the IMan project has developed a shared action methodology so that these organizations can act in a strategic, concerted and consistent manner against Islamophobia, at both the national and european levels.23

2. data gatherIng and eMpowerIng the vIctIMs

data gathering is an essential activity in the fight against Islamophobia, even if it is not an end in itself.

Indeed, it is simply impossible to understand and analyze a phenomenon without any figures or statistics on trends at one’s disposal.

The reluctance of member states to collect this information is a first obstacle. But the with the reluctance of people of the Muslim faith to report acts of discrimi-nation against them is also an obstacle. As we have seen, this reluctance comes from a climate of non-recognition of the phenomenon and of underestimating the suffering of victims.

Organizations across Europe are making the same observation: only a fraction of the victims of Islamophobia are taking steps to report the act and stand up for their rights.

All too often, they are unaware of their rights and have no confidence in the po-lice and the justice system.

No measures (awareness or information campaign, for example) have been ta-ken to date by the governments of member States to encourage victims of Isla-mophobia to speak out.

23 - IMAN methodology “La Quantification du Préjudice”, by Marwan Muhammad http://iman-pro-ject.org/fr/publications/quantification-du-prejudiceEnglish version: http://iman-project.org/publications/quantification-prejudice-2

24 25

“Out of all the testimonies collected, less than 2 people out of 10 have taken steps after being the victim of discrimination. The reasons are many. Almost half of the victims said they weren’t aware of their rights and didn’t know where to turn. What’s worse, 3 victims of discrimination out of 10 believe that the justice system will not stand behind them,” notes the Centre for Equal Opportunities in Belgium.

The Swedish organization Muslims for Peace and Justice even estimated that only 2% of Islamophobic acts are reported to the police.In France, the ccIF has observed the same trend: only 4% of all victims file a com-plaint after suffering discrimination. and this already very low figure drops to 2% when it comes to discrimination taking place in institutions.

The lack of structures that could help these victims is definitely a handicap. The report of the FRA (Fundamental Rights Agency) states that, “on average, 80% of respondents (people of the Muslim faith) are not aware of any organization that can provide assistance or advice to victims of discrimination”.

The IMAN project therefore intends to address this significant lack of data on Islamophobia in Europe and the isolation of the victims by training the member organizations in the IMAN network in data collection methodology and in support to victims.

The flagship tool of the project is without a doubt the online platform Imanet, an Intranet that can be used and accessed by any member organization in the network, and through which users can compile acts of Islamophobia, collect all the information needed to process a case and support the victim, and automati-cally generate statistics based on the information stored on the platform.

3. cooperatIon needed between cIvIl socIety and european InstItutIons

In its 2012 report, Amnesty International worried that “anti-discrimination laws are not implemented effectively in the member States, and the European institu-tions fail to address the problem”.24

For European authorities to improve efficiency, they are in dire need of the infor-mation reported by civil society organizations. As for civil society organizations, they need the support of European authorities to move forward and make their voices heard before the member States.

24 - Amnesty International 2012 Report “Choice and Prejudice. Discrimination against Muslims in Europe” http://www.amnesty.eu/content/assets/REPORT.pdf

24 25

On January 29, 2013 in Strasbourg, the COJEP25 organization held a conference on the theme of «the rise of racism through the European media,» whose focus was Islamophobia.

The Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe, Nils Muižnieks, gave the opening remarks at the conference, in which he stressed the need for close and regular cooperation between NGOs fighting against racism and Islamopho-bia and the Council of Europe, whose mission is to defend human rights in the European Union.

Institutions do not work in the field with the victims, but instead focus on the le-gislative and policy frameworks of the member States. They therefore need the knowledge and experience of grassroots organizations, which remain the vic-tims’ main spokepersons.

4. conservatIve progress: towards a brIghter Future?

the IMAN project in and of itself is an encouraging step forward. It is the first pan-European network of civil society organizations that are uniting to fight against Islamophobia with an organized and strategic approach.

The organizations face great difficulties, mainly financial ones. Indeed, collecting data and supporting victims are activities that require time and both human and material resources.

The IMAN network is made up of dynamic organizations, but some of them are new to the fight against Islamophobia and operate primarily via volunteers.

nevertheless, the scale of the challenge and the efficiency of the IMan project’s tools have enabled the network’s member organizations to improve their capa-city and reinforce their actions.

While Islamophobia is not yet being fought at a level befitting its terrible nature, it is nevertheless being increasingly recognized and studied.

Across Europe, it has become an area of study in universities. Many researchers in England, France, Sweden and Norway are producing theses and sociological studies on Islamophobia.

European authorities are beginning to address the problem, namely by organi-zing or taking part in conferences, workshops and symposia on the issue.

25 - Turkish NGO. http://www.cojep.com

26

Cooperation between European authorities and civil society organizations must be strengthened even more, namely by allocating funds from Europe to the NGOs, especially those with a mission to support victims.

data gathering and support to victims, in the context of the fight against Isla-mophobia, should be common and concerted activities between ngos and eu-ropean institution— thus serving as an example to other member states, which should also have to implement the system in their respective territories.

26 2727

this report is part of the IMAN project’s activities. The project is finishing up its first phase in December 2014 and will pursue its efforts over the long term.

The three main activities of the IMAN project—data gathering, victim support and training—are meant to be increased in the future, and thus other countries and organizations will join the IMAN network.

To conclude this report, following is a list of recommendations that our organi-zations are making to European institutions as key measures to take in the fight against Islamophobia.

• Establish a stronger partnership between European institutions that protect human rights (Council of Europe, OSCE-ODIHR) and civil society organizations specialized in the fight against Islamophobia.

• Allocate European funds to enable organizations to collect data on acts of Islamophobia and to support victims (the two critical deficien-cies in Europe when it comes to the fight against Islamophobia).

• Set up, at the national level, a system for gathering «data broken down in terms of equality» that would aim to better understand the forms of discrimination to better fight them. This system would include the cultu-ral and religious dimension, in addition to gender and age, which are already widely accepted.

• Organize awareness campaigns, conferences and workshops, in par-tnership with organizations with a focus on Islamophobia.

• Integrate the fight against Islamophobia in the fight against violence against women and the fight for gender equality. Integrate it as well as in the existing provisions regarding women’s access to the workforce, and the fight against discrimination against women.

• Encourage and support access to information about their rights for victims and potential victims of discrimination. Encourage and support the emergence of effective structures providing care and support to victims of Islamophobia.

From Observations To Action: Our Recommendations

29

iman-project.org

contact

Elsa Ray – Project ManagerElsa.ray@iman-project.org

With the support of EU Fundamental Rights & Citizenship Programme

The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not neces-sarily reflect those of the European Commission or any other party.

31303030

http://iman-project.org/fr/network/organisations-partenaires/

sweden

Musulmans pour la Paix et la Justicehttp://muslimerforfred.org

Centre Contre le Racismewww.centrummotrasism.nu

Italy

CAIM - Coordinamento Associazioni Islamiche di Milano e Monza e Brianza

GMI Giovani Musulmani d’Italiahttp://www.giovanimusulmani.it/GMI

The IMAN Network

31303030

germany

Federation against Injustice and Racism FAIRinfo@fair-int.de

england

Federation of Student Islamic Societieswww.fosis.org.uk

Mend ex iENGAGEwww.iengage.org.uk

Muslim Council of Britainhttp://www.mcb.org.uk

1963 - 2013

32 33

France

CCIF - Collectif contre l’islamophobie en Francewww.islamophobie.net

EMF – Etudiants musulmans de Francewww.emf-asso.com

hungary

Organization of Muslims in Hungaryhttp://iszlam.com

32 33

belgium

Forum Européens des Organisa-tions Etudiantes Musulmaneshttp://www.femyso.org

Kif Kif (organisation flamande)http://www.kifkif.be

Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en Belgique http://www.islamophobia.be