Blasphemy-related extremism must never be tolerated

An exclusive survey of over a thousand teachers by YouGov, commissioned by Policy Exchange, confirms that teachers, tasked with encouraging young minds to be inquisitive and think critically, are concerned about being accused of offending religious sensibilities. A small but significant proportion of them – 16 per cent – are self-censoring.

As concerning as this is, it is hardly surprising – the shadow of Batley still looms large. More than two years after the Batley Grammar School protests, the teacher who received death threats for showing a caricature of the prophet Muhammad to a religious studies class remains in hiding. Former Education Secretary Nadim Zahawi, writing in the foreword to the survey report, rightly describes this as “a national disgrace”.

Half of British teachers believe that if blasphemy-related protests led by activist groups occur outside their schools, there would be a risk to their physical safety. In the East Midlands, the proportion of teachers fearing this risk rises to around six in ten. And a large proportion of teachers believe that images of Muhammad should never be used in classrooms, regardless of a teacher’s intentions and even whilst teaching Islamic art or ethics. Despite occurring over two years ago, the Batley protests appear to have had a significant impact on teachers’ willingness to use an image of Muhammad: in addition to the 55 per cent of teachers who would not personally use an image of Muhammad anyway, a further 9 per cent said they personally were less likely to use it as a result of the events in Batley.

Concerns regarding de facto blasphemy codes in schools are not confined to teaching staff. In February this year, in Wakefield, a 14-year-old autistic student received death threats after allegedly scuffing his own copy of the Quran. Although the headteacher of the school said there was no “malicious intent”, West Yorkshire Police initially treated the incident as a “non-crime hate incident”. The previous home secretary acted swiftly. Less than two weeks later she announced new statutory guidance for the police on the recording of “non-crime hate incidents” to prioritise freedom of expression. Under the new code of practice, personal data may only be included in a non-crime hate incident record if the incident is clearly motivated by intentional hostility and if there is a real risk of significant harm or a criminal offence.

However, the Government is yet to deliver on the promise, made in the wake of the events in Wakefield, to provide clearer and firmer guidance for schools in the event of blasphemy-related incidents. Disappointingly, the Department for Education has said it has no plans for new guidance and it is doubtful that the Home Office will develop such plans. In April, Lord Sharpe, speaking on behalf of the Home Office, said that “the Government has been repeatedly clear that there is no blasphemy law in Great Britain” and that there are no plans to produce guidance for blasphemy-related incidents.

Indeed, it is a welcome thing that blasphemy is no longer a crime in England, Scotland and Wales. But it is not good enough to dismiss blasphemy as a “crime” of the past, when blasphemy-related incidents have become increasingly frequent, and when teachers are self-censoring and fear for their physical safety in the event of activist-led protests outside schools.

According to Policy Exchange’s survey, 40 per cent of teachers say that their schools do not have any guidance for teachers on avoiding offence from teaching materials or lesson content. Many schools thus lack a code of practice for dealing with blasphemy-related incidents and similar situations where unintentional offence could lead to protests or even violence. Teachers and students should not have to rely on strong individual headteachers or governing bodies. It is imperative to establish national statutory guidance in this area, especially given the potential security risks.

Blasphemy-related extremism was recognised in William Shawcross’s Independent Review of Prevent, published in February, which said the Batley protests were “precisely the type of challenge where Prevent should institute urgent additional resources”.

It remains unclear, however, what the Government has done or plans to do to meet this challenge. And the Government’s approach should not be confined to Prevent. It is not just a matter of countering terrorism or ideologically-driven violence. It is fundamentally about protecting and championing national values. As schools increasingly become sites of protest activism, the Government needs to up its game and provide clearer and firmer support for head teachers to protect our teachers and the liberal values of our country.

Our teachers – and our pupils – deserve nothing less.

Dr Damon L. Perry is a Senior Research Fellow at Policy Exchange

Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our US-exclusive offer.