Where Unity Is Strength
Header

Serious concerns about the APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition 

September 5th, 2024 | Posted by admin in Current Issues | Press Releases | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

Serious concerns about the APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition – the ability to freely discuss religion, speak openly about historical truths, and an amplification of a government hierarchy for different faiths

FAO: The Rt Hon Angela Rayner, Deputy-Prime Minister – Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government

We want to raise our grave concerns about the APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition which has already been adopted by the Labour party and incorporated into its governing body’s code of conduct. Adoption of this contested definition into law would have serious implications on free speech, not least the ability to discuss historical truths. The former home secretary Sajid Javid argued adopting the APPG definition would ‘risk creating a blasphemy law via the backdoor’.[i] Meanwhile, former Labour MP Khalid Mahmood co-authored a report outlining how the definition has already been weaponised to shut down those accused of offending some members of the Muslim community.[ii]

Of course, we understand that the government needs to take steps to tackle anti-Muslim/anti-immigrant hatred in response to rioting in Southport and across our country in recent weeks. The targeting of mosques and asylum seeker hotels by hooligans and opportunistic thugs is reprehensible and should be universally condemned, as is the targeting of white people by Muslim counter protestors whom they perceived to be ‘far right’. But targeting criminality with a flawed definition of ‘Islamophobia’, would be counterproductive and there is no evidence it would reduce anti-Muslim hatred in any case. We agree with the National Secular Society (NSS) when they say, adoption of the APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition, ‘will exacerbate tensions and threaten freedom to criticise religion.’[iii]

All religions and beliefs already have equal protection under the law. The APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition, which wrongly defines ‘Islamophobia’ as a form of ‘racism’ is deeply flawed, and something we’ve opposed along with a coalition of groups and individuals since 2019.[iv] It has been opposed by some Muslim groups too, due to the conflation of race and religion, as well as confusion around the meaning of the term ‘Muslimness’. So much so, that a thinktank report highlighted how the Muslim community served by both Bradford and Barnet council, came up with an alternative definition in consultation with the council.[v]Moreover, there are several alternative definitions of ‘Islamophobia’ in circulation. The largest Muslim student organisation – FOSIS – also opposes the APPG definition on the grounds that it conflates race and religion.[vi]This, we submit, does not fit with The Equality Act 2010 – to borrow a phrase from the former government, this definition is simply ‘not fit for purpose’.

As a representative organisation of British Sikhs, we are particularly troubled that one of the working examples of ‘Islamophobia’ which accompanies the APPG definition, includes the words: ‘…claims of Muslims spreading Islam by the sword or subjugating minority groups under their rule..’ On the face of it, this is a devious attempt at historical revisionism. Islam did indeed spread ‘by the sword’, and the subjugation of minority groups under Islamic rule continues to this day. Take the recent ethnic cleansing of Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan as an example, or the massacre of Yazidis by ISIS, the reference to the ‘genocide in slow motion’ of Christians by the Archbishop of Nigeria,[vii] or the appalling treatment and persecution of minority faiths in Bangladesh and Pakistan. If the government choses to incorporate this definition into law, then discussing the history of the Indian subcontinent, and the persecution of religious minorities across the world today, in countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nigeria will be absurdly equated to ‘racism’.  This would be counterproductive, cause disquiet and perversely persecute truth tellers.

Moreover, seminal moments in Sikh history will be censored and considered ‘racist’, like the martyrdom of our 9th Guru, Tegh Bahadur, or 5th Guru, Arjan. This has been emphasised in a report by the Free Speech Union (FSU) – Banning Islamophobia: Blasphemy Law By The Back Door.[viii] By shutting down historical truths about current and historical religious persecution, the government will create a hierarchy of religions. Images of Sikh martyrs are displayed in some gurdwaras across the UK. Many of these would be deemed ‘Islamophobic’ – equated to ‘racism’ and potentially subject to criminal complaint. However, we’d be free to talk about the crusades and early Christian antisemitism, without fear of being censored by complaints of ‘Christianophobia’. The right to openly discuss religions, their beliefs and history, is a basic tenant of public debate and the free exchange of ideas. This essential freedom is critical to safeguarding pluralism and broadmindedness. It is, we are sure you’ll agree, the bedrock of a civilised, free and liberal society. 

Any adoption of the APPG definition into law, would be untenable and would serve to create religious discrimination, which is likely to be subject to legal challenge in the form of a judicial review. We believe more free speech is the answer, not less. Yes, there are difficult conversations to have about historical truths, or specific aspects of religion, but shutting them down, is not the solution. We believe describing prejudice against Muslims as ‘anti-Muslim’ is much more accurate (and compliant with existing law), as would be the description of prejudice against Sikhs, Hindus and Christians as ‘anti-Sikh’, ‘anti-Hindu’ or ‘anti-Christian’. Our country needs a level playing field for all faiths and none, not preferential treatment for select groups. 

The APPG ‘Islamophobia’ definition refers to targeting ‘expressions of Muslimness’ – one aspect of the invented term ‘Muslimness’ would surely involve dietary requirements. If so, this would surely incorporate the consumption of halal meat. Sikhs are strictly forbidden to eat halal slaughtered meat (see Sikh Rehat Maryada– code of conduct),[ix] it is because we believe halal slaughter, especially non-stun slaughter, is inhumane, and that praying over an animal at the time of slaughter is an act of superstition. Just asserting these facts and alternative beliefs, would, by virtue of this definition, be deemed to be targeting ‘expressions of Muslimness’. If the government chooses to incorporate this flawed definition into law, a religious hierarchy will be promoted – one religion’s belief protected, another’s penalised, which would not be consistent with equality and human rights legislation. Article 9 of the Human Rights Act: Freedom of thought, conscience and religion asserts: ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching practice and observance’.[x] A manifestation of the Sikh faith is the rejection of halal slaughter and meat. As Sikhs, we have every right to express our belief, which is protected in law.  Article 10 of the Human Rights Act on freedom of expression, protects the right to hold opinions and to express them freely without government interference. If the APPG definition of ‘Islamophobia’ is to be adopted into law; it would almost certainly be incompatible with both Articles 9 and 10, rights set out in the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). 

To illustrate the absurdity of the APPG definition further, the founder of Tell MAMA the anti-Muslim hate crime monitor, recently explained that his criticism of polygamy, practiced amongst some Muslims, would also be considered ‘Islamophobic’.[xi] The word ‘Islamophobia’ is a deliberately vague and catch-all term. Moreover, the recently invented word ‘Muslimness’, is simply a flawed attempt to ascribe an ethnicity onto a faith. 

Deputy Prime Minister, we urge you to seriously consider the detrimental implications of this definition to free speech, not least the freedom to discuss religion, as well as the freedom to openly discuss historical truths. One thing is guaranteed, the British Sikh community will strongly resist any attempt to distort recorded history. Sikhs firmly believe that open discussion will help identify important ethical commonalities, which can make ours, a more tolerant and caring society. As our Director, Lord Singh of Wimbledon once put it: ‘religions should not be seen as barriers between people, but gateways to a greater understanding and enrichment of life’.

England and Wales already have primary legislation in place which prohibits the stirring up of religious hatred. See: Part 3A Public Order Act 1998. Section 29J of the Act exempts certain forms of speech from prosecution regarding religion:

Nothing in this Part shall be read or given effect in a way which prohibits or restricts discussion, criticism or expressions of antipathy, dislike, ridicule, insult or abuse of particular religions or the beliefs or practices of their adherents, or of any other belief system or the beliefs or practices of its adherents, or proselytising or urging adherents of a different religion or belief system to cease practising their religion or belief system.

Applying the APPG’s definition of ‘Islamophobia’ as a form of hate speech would make Section 29J dead letter as it pertains to Islam. It would also create a tension in the law where Islam is treated more favourably than other religions, a state of affairs which would run afoul of Article 9 of the ECHR.

If the government were to incorporate this contested definition into law, it would create a hierarchy of religions in England and Wales and provide cover to extremists who want to shut down legitimate criticism, or inconvenient truths – historical or otherwise. The government would be in breach of existing equality and human rights law, and any such decision would almost certainly be subject to a judicial review. 

Yours sincerely,

Network of Sikh Organisations 

CC Lord Khan of Burnley 

CC Sikh MPs

[i] https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/22/extremists-exploit-islamophobia-tag-to-stifle-free-speech/

[ii] https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/A-definition-of-Islamophobia.pdf

[iii] https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2024/08/religion-phobia-definitions-must-be-avoided-nss-warns-government

[iv] https://www.secularism.org.uk/news/2019/05/islamophobia-definition-unfit-for-purpose-say-campaigners

[v] https://www.civitas.org.uk/publications/islamophobia-revisited/

[vi] https://fosis.org.uk/news/fosis-position-on-the-appg-definition-of-islamophobia/

[vii] https://efacglobal.com/nigerian-anglican-primate-says-christians-are-facing-genocide-in-slow-motion/

[viii] https://freespeechunion.org/banning-islamophobia-blasphemy-law-by-the-backdoor/

[ix] https://old.sgpc.net/rehat_maryada/section_one.html

[x] https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/human-rights/human-rights-act/article-9-freedom-thought-belief-and-religion#:~:text=1.,2.

[xi] https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/this-rush-to-define-islamophobia-will-harm-free-speech-hjsqvknnr

Credibility of Sikh Federation UK shattered – ONS release 2021 Sikh Census data

December 18th, 2023 | Posted by admin in Current Issues | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

Newly released data from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) show that only 0.3% of Britain’s 525,865 Sikhs accept the Sikh Federation UK’s (SFUK) line that UK Sikhs are a singularly distinct ethnic group, and not a part of a forward-looking world religion open to all.

The Details

ONS statistics from the 2021 Census show: 426,230 people identified as Sikh through the religion question alone – that’s 81% of the total number of responders and the vast majority.

Only 1,725 responded through the ethnic group question alone – 0.3% of the total number of responders. This is a significant drop from the 2011 Census, where 6,862 identified their ethnic group only as ‘Sikh’. The absurdity of the SFUK’s longstanding campaign is illustrated by data from within this tiny segment of 1,725 who identified their ethnic group as ‘Sikh’.

Remarkably, 55.4% of them did not report their religion, 13.6% recorded it as Muslim, 12.5% reported no religion and 8.7% said their religion was Christian. So, thanks in part to the SFUK, and the lobbying via the SFUK influenced APPG for British Sikhs – we absurdly have ‘ethnic’ Sikhs who are Islamic by faith – ‘ethnic’ Sikhs who are Christian (it is not clear if they are Catholic or Presbyterian) and ‘ethnic’ Sikhs who don’t have a faith – this presumably includes atheists and agnostics.

The question to ask SFUK – a simple yes or no – was Guru Nanak the founder of a global world religion? Moreover, British Sikhs now deserve to know how much of the sangat’s money was used in legal fees to challenge the ONS through the courts?

The positive findings

Indeed, there are some positive findings from the Census data not least:

  • Around a third (36.7%) of people who identified as Sikh reported a Level 4 or above qualification, similar to the percentage for the England and Wales population (33.8%)
  • Higher percentages of home ownership among people who identified as Sikh (77.7%), compared with the England and Wales population (62.7%).
  • People who identified as Sikh were more likely to be married than the England and Wales population (61.0% and 44.4%, respectively) and were more likely to have married younger.

[ENDS]

,

BBC’s attempt to undermine Sikh teachings on marriage

February 8th, 2023 | Posted by admin in Current Issues | Press Releases | Sikhism | Thought for the day - (0 Comments)

It is well documented and admitted by the BBC that they tried to prevent our Director, Lord Singh, speaking on Thought for the Day (TFTD) about Guru Nanak, the founder of the Sikh faith. He was also pressurised to minimise the contribution of Maharaja Ranjit Singh in promoting harmony and respect between faiths. Unbelievably, after a script of a talk on the martyrdom of Guru Tegh Bahadur had been agreed with the producer of the day, he was asked late in the evening to scrap it and talk about something else. He stood his ground and said that freedom of belief was important to the world of today, and he made it clear that if he was not allowed to talk about Guru Tegh Bahadur, there would be an empty chair in the studio next morning. Faced with this, the producer agreed to the talk going ahead. It was well received.


Our Director complained about the above, and other attempts to belittle Sikh teachings, and in the absence of an assurance that this would stop, he left the TFTD slot after 35 years of broadcasting which won him acclaim from all sections of society. His departure made front page news in the Times and was also the subject of an editorial highly critical of the BBC attempt to censor the tolerant and compassionate contributions of a nationally recognised broadcaster. Thousands of Sikhs signed a petition protesting the BBC attack on Sikh teachings, but to no avail.


Jasvir Singh, an occasional presenter on TFTD chose to remain silent during this flagrant attack on Sikh teachings. He was duly rewarded for his loyalty to the BBC, and made ‘the main Sikh contributor’ on TFTD. The BBC have now rewarded his silence during the attack on foundational Sikh teachings, giving him coverage on the BBC Radio 4 programme – Beyond Belief. They have promoted Jasvir’s gay identity and civil marriage to a non-Sikh. Jasvir tells the BBC that he and his husband received a blessing from a granthi, but went on, ‘could we get married in a gurdwara, sadly the answer was no’, indicating that’s what the couple had intended. The presenter then asks, ‘so why couldn’t Jasvir and his husband Nick have a wedding they wanted within the faith tradition that means so much to Jasvir?’


Sikhism does not condemn homosexuality and Jasvir is of course entitled to choose his lifestyle, but its peculiar that the BBC have described him as a ‘devout Sikh’. This is because Sikhism teaches the Sikh marriage ceremony or Anand Karaj, should be between a man and a woman for their mutual wellbeing, the upbringing of children, and service to the wider community. The Anand Karaj is not an inter-faith or same-sex ceremony.


It is a matter of real concern that after our Director presented the above view of marriage in Sikhism, with appropriate scriptural references to the BBC, it vainly sought others in the community who were unable to effectively articulate that Jasvir’s position on the Anand Karaj ceremony is not consistent with Sikh teachings. Whilst we condemn the threats that Jasvir has received for his sexuality from a fringe minority, Sikh teachings on Anand-Karaj are clear.


Urgent need


Religious broadcasting must have safeguards against attempts by Christian or other producers to belittle, smear or trivialise the teachings of other faiths. There is an urgent need for an Advisory Body to ensure personal prejudices of producers are not allowed to dilute mainstream teachings of other faiths, which should be respectfully and accurately presented in religious broadcasting.

, , , , ,

New Year’s message from the Director of the Network of Sikh Organisations

December 31st, 2021 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

Dear Khalsa ji,

Waheguru ji ka Khalsa; Waheguru ji ki Fateh.

As we leave 2021 and enter 2022, it is important that we look closely at the forces and pressures that resonate in the Sikh community and reflect on how these help or hinder us in living true to our Gurus’ teachings.

The Challenges

The Sikh religion consists primarily of the teachings of the Sikh Gurus enshrined in the Guru Granth Sahib.

Our Gurus experienced several challenges to their leadership from false claimants to the Guruship seeking to use the popularity of Sikh teachings to further their own selfish interests.

Guru Gobind Singh was acutely aware that these challenges would continue after him and gave us his far-sighted injunction ‘Guru Manio Granth’. That is that we should shun those who try to bend Sikh teachings for their own ends and follow the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib as we would a living Guru.

The Sikh Gurus incorporated writings of Hindu and Muslim saints in the Guru Granth Sahib to emphasise that no religion has a monopoly of truth. In the same way, leading Sikh scholars who compiled the 1945 Sikh Rehat Maryada also accepted the authenticity of some writings, popularly attributed to Guru Gobind Singh found in the misleadingly titled Dasam Granth (a 19th century compendium of mostly amorous exploits of gods and goddesses compiled by a Brahmin called Chiber).

PRIORITIES FOR 2022

As Sikhs we must heed Guru Gobind Singh’s clear warning about false gurus, and totally reject the siren call of sants and babas, distorting and offering questionable short cuts to the disciplined life taught by the Gurus.

As a community we must also be aware of political lobbyists here in Britain, who push an agenda which stands in contradiction to the uplifting teachings of our Gurus. Sikhism is a global world religion open to all, irrespective of race, class or any other background as the Gurus rightly intended. Those who continue to tell us we are part of some kind of ‘ethnic’ group, must be challenged and their arguments strenuously refuted at every juncture.

On the international front the NSO has supported the Indian farmers’ right to peacefully protest and briefed MPs on the developments since the farmers’ uprising against laws which not only disadvantaged them but risked their very livelihoods. We will continue to support them.

There is much work to be done, we have worked tirelessly in many areas including helping Afghan Sikhs, making sure Sikhs are included in the hate crime debate, and fighting for our right to freedom of expression. On the latter we were part of a coalition of free speech defending groups pushing back on elements of the draft Scottish Hate Crime Bill – now the Hate Crime Act. With our coalition of partners in Free to Disagree, we managed to defend free speech and get an amendment in the Bill, to allow people to freely discuss religion without censorship or fear of criminal proceedings. The fight for minority rights has been another aspect of our ongoing work, and we continue to collaborate with groups including The APPG for International Freedom of Religion or Belief to both challenge and shine a torch on those who persecute minority faiths overseas.

THE ROLE OF SIKHISM IN 2022 AND BEYOND

The Sikh religion is a strong faith rooted in compassion and common sense and has nothing to fear from discussion and questioning which can only make its teachings clearer and stronger. Our Gurus were far-sighted human beings who far from claiming special powers, warned us against superstitious beliefs and idle speculation about peripherals of belief.

Our responsibility as Sikhs is to live true to the teachings of our Gurus and make them known to a wider world which in many ways has lost its ethical direction. Many coming across Sikh teachings for the first time applaud its powerful emphasis on the equality of all human beings, gender equality respect for freedom of belief, and our responsibility to work for a just and peaceful society.

The challenge for all Sikhs in 2022 is to look beyond ourselves, and while being true to Sikh teachings, commit ourselves to living these values in serving the wider community. If we can overcome our petty internal divisions by focusing on the actual teachings of our Gurus and live the life they taught, 2022 can be an important year of unity and fulfilment for us all.

Indarjit Singh CBE,

Lord Singh of Wimbledon

Director, Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO) UK

, ,

The Sikh Messenger podcast series

September 12th, 2020 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | religious literacy | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

We are delighted to have launched the Sikh Messenger podcast series last month.

In the first of the series we interviewed Harbakhsh Grewal about his roles at the UK Punjab Heritage Association (UKPHA) and publisher Kashi House. We ask him about the seminal volume Warrior Saints, by historians Parmjit Singh and Amandeep Singh Madra, and the popular exhibitions hosted by UKPHA at the SOAS Brunei gallery – including The Sikhs and World War 1 in 2014. You can listen to the interview here.

Later in August, as part of the Catch ‘Together Against Hate’ 2020 project we interviewed Billie Boyd a Hate Crime Support worker at the charity Galop. We find out about her role and how she has made a tangible difference for her clients who have suffered discrimination and hatred for being part of the LGBT community. You can listen to the interview here.

As part of the same series – we then had the pleasure of talking to our Director Lord Singh of Wimbledon who told us about his early life in Britain, the challenges with racism at that time, which later included a backlash against Sikhs post 9/11 in so called ‘mistaken identity’ attacks. Lord Singh reveals how he used humour to deal with racism during those early years. You can listen to the interview here.

We then spoke to Suresh Grover, Director of the Monitoring Group in Southall – a veteran anti-racism campaigner who has led campaigns to help the families of Stephen Lawrence, Zahid Mubarek and Victoria Climbie. He talks about ‘Paki bashing’, the history of Southall and the role of the Punjabi community during the tumultuous period following the racist murder of schoolboy Gurinder Singh Chaggar in 1976. Listen to part 1 of the interview here: Listen to Part 2 here.

In our most recent interviews, we talked to our Deputy-Director Hardeep Singh who has co-authored a volume titled Racialization, Islamophobia and Mistaken Identity: The Sikh Experience, and also Chief Supt Raj Singh Kohli who surprised us with the prejudice he has faced over the years – from his early years at school, through to post 9/11. But he didn’t take it lying down – his story is both uplifting and remarkable. We will be uploading the interviews onto both Anchor and YouTube soon.

If anyone has any suggestions on who we should interview and the topics they’d like to hear about, contact us: info@nsouk.co.uk

, , , ,

Why the flouting of Sikh Rehat Maryada at Bangla Sahib gurdwara should concern all Sikhs

September 12th, 2020 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Sikhism - (0 Comments)
Illuminated Adi Granth folio with nisan of Guru Gobind Singh. The manuscript is of the Lahore recension, late 17th to early 18th century. Gold and colours on paper; folio size 360 x 283mm, illumination size 256 x 193mm. Collection of Takht Sri Harimandir Sahib, Patna. Photograph: Jeevan Singh Deol.

There is one thing that unites all Sikhs around the world irrespective of the status of their personal spiritual journey or background – that is the primacy of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (SGGS) – the eternal Guru of the Sikhs and Guru Gobind Singh’s clear edict ‘Guru Manyeo Granth’, which recognises the Guru Granth Sahib as the only eternal Guru. But there are insidious forces at play – some with allegiance to Hindutva, who are looking to tarnish, distort and pervert the foundations of our great world religion.

Another iteration of this presented itself at the beginning of the month. On 1st September 2020, the Delhi Gurdwara Parbandakh Committee (DGPC) sanctioned discourses from the so called Dasam Granth (DG) to be read from the gurdwara. This action is a direct challenge to the primacy of SGGS. Following protests, we understand the DGPC have said this won’t happen again, but whether or not this is the case remains to be seen. As previously discussed, the authorship of parts of the DG is a matter of significant dispute. When the Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM) was compiled in the 1940s, highly respected scholars at the time discarded the majority of the DG writings, which could not be attributed to Guru Gobind Singh. Some of these included amorphous and pornographic exploits of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, as well as misogyny and the denigration of women.

The DGPC should be ashamed of their decision to let this go ahead and we support the efforts of the Malaysian Gurudwara Council in their letter to the Akal Takht (pdf below) to take action against this flouting of the SRM. Although these events are in India, there are groups in the UK who are promoting this anti-Sikh agenda and we have pointed to this in the past. In 2018 there was the case of Amrik Singh Chandigarh – a preacher who promotes the primacy of SGGS, who was attacked by thugs associated with a sect called the Taksal. Sadly, the gurdwara committee in Southall where the incident took place did not condemn the thuggery, and at one point perversely sided with the Taksali bully boys. Another respected Sikh, is still have physiotherapy to this day, having been violently attacked over a decade ago by unsavoury elements in our midst.

Letter-to-Akal-Takht-Violations-at-Bangla-Sahib-Gurdwara-265_05_01-20-1Download

All Sikh groups must openly challenge this kinds of behavior.

Sadly, groups like the tick box obsessed Sikh Federation UK (SFUK) previously failed to condemn the attack on Amrik Singh Chandigarh. We now ask them to join us in condemning the actions of the DGPC and their disregard for the SRM.

We note that in May 2019 the SFUK published a tweet which read:

‘Lord Indarjit Singh, Director of the Network of Sikh Organisations writes deeply offensive comments regards Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s Dasam Granth Bani (scripture) and his initiated Damdami Taksal. We demand Lord Singh apologies (sic) to the millions of Sikhs around the world.’

Although we understand from sources that the DGPC have promised protesters that the insult to Sikh teachings won’t happen again, all British Sikh groups should unequivocally condemn the course of action originally taken by them.

This includes The SFUK, Sikh Council UK, The Sikh Assembly and City Sikhs.

Silence will speak volumes.

, , , , ,

The BBC’s attempt to censor Guru Tegh Bahadur’s martyrdom – how you can help

November 8th, 2019 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Radio | Sikhism | Thought for the day - (0 Comments)

We have been overwhelmed by supportive messages for our Director following the front-page headline in The Times last month – ‘Sikh peer leaves BBC Radio 4 show with swipe at ‘thought police’’.  The solidarity has come from all over the world, from Sikhs and people of other faiths and none – including Christians, Jews, Muslims and Hindus. It is a matter of grave concern that an overzealous producer had the temerity to insult Sikhism by attempting to censor the sacrifice of our 9th Guru, Tegh Bahadur, who gave his life standing up for freedom of religious belief in the face of tyranny. In an increasingly fractured society, it is these very values that must be celebrated and promoted – not censored by the ‘thought’ police.

The story was covered across the media including in the Sun, Express, Telegraph, Daily Mail, Times of India and many more.

You can read Lord Singh’s opinion editorial in the Mail on Sunday here and our Deputy-Director Hardeep Singh wrote an article for the Spectator.

We are pursuing a complaint against the BBC for the insult to Sikh teachings and cannot do this without your support.

We have set up a petition and need as many signatures as possible: The petition can be signed here: https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/public-inquiry-into-bbc-censorship-and-bias

We are grateful for those that contacted us with messages of solidarity including the following:

‘Lord Singh is a Sikh ambassador, who speaks about the teachings of Guru’s with passion. The Sikh Guru’s taught equality, truthfulness and honesty, they fought and sacrificed their life for freedom of worship and other injustices, regardless of who they were.’ Kuldip M

‘Lord Singh is not alone and with support we need to highlight the orchestrated bias within the BBC’ Manjit B.

, , , ,

The truth about the anti-Sikh agenda of those promoting the Dasam Granth

May 31st, 2019 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Press Releases | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

 Guru Maneyo Granth—Guru Gobind Singh

Guru Maneyo Granths-Those who wish to take us back to the worship of gods and goddesses.

The Reality behind the misleadingly named Dasam Granth

The so-called Dasam Granth is a compilation of largely amoral myths and stories produced by Brahmins to fool gullible Sikhs into diluting and distorting the teachings of the Gurus with Hindu mythology.

Evidence

  • Guru Gobind Singh gave Gurgadhi to the Guru Granth Sahib alone.
  • Neither Guru Gobind Singh nor his contemporaries ever referred to any such composition.
  • The first reference to such a composition was made not by a Sikh but revealingly, by a Brahmin called Chibber, 70 years after Guru Gobind Singh.
  • Chibber himself admits that what he wrote was based on hearsay.
  • The first mention of ‘Dasam Granth’ was much later, in 1850 at a time of Hindu resurgence in Punjab.
  • The mischievously named Dasam Granth contains tales of the amorous exploits of Hindu gods and goddesses.The whole notion of gods and goddesses is contrary to Sikh teachings on one God of all humanity (Ek Onkar), who is beyond birth, death and human frailty.
  • The Mool Mantar states that God does not take birth. The Dasam Granth says God took birth 24 times.
  • Sikh teachings emphasise the dignity and complete equality of women. The Dasam Granth denigrates women as lesser beings who are always ready to entice men to their will with their supposed 404 wiles. Women it claims, are ready to resort to intrigues and commit murder to get their way. It says that even God regretted creating such beautiful creatures.
  • In a translation of ‘The Poetry of the Dasam Granth’ former Vice President of India Dr S Radhakrishanan and Dr Dharam Pal, state: ‘in most of the tales, the themes are love, sex debauchery, violence, crime or poison. They are extremely racy and frankly licentious’.
  • Out of respect for common decency, this note does not give examples of these pornographic writings.
  • The so-called Dasam Granth was first propagated by Hindu Arya Samaj extremists, who included in it some compositions, which could possibly be those of Guru Gobind Singh, to make it more appealing to Sikhs. NOTE: These were examined by eminent Sikh scholars in several years of extensive consultation and are listed in the 1945 Rehat Maryada published by the SGPC, as being in consonance with Sikh teachings. The rest of the Dasam Granth was unanimously rejected.
  • In the years following the 1984 holocaust, Hindu extremists have tried to finish Sikhism in the Punjab, and to this end, the Punjab Government produced and distributed thousands of copies of the Dasam Granth, free of cost to many towns and villages in Punjab.
  • One can understand uneducated villagers in Punjab being misled by the word ‘dasam’ sadly, some educated Sikhs in the UK are also being misled to reject the clear and far-sighted message of Guru Gobind Singh sung after the Ardas-Guru Maneyo Granth, consider the teachings of the Guru Granth Sahib to be the sole perpetual guidance for all Sikhs.

[Ends]

, , , , ,

The kirpan gets full protection in law

March 20th, 2019 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Press Releases | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

The NSO is delighted to report the government has approved an amendment to fully protect the kirpan in law.

The Offensive Weapons Bill (OWB) went through its third reading in the House of Lords yesterday in which ‘the legal presentation of a curved sword by a follower of the Sikh religion at a ceremonial event’ was discussed and an amendment to fully protect the kirpan passed unanimously. The opportunity to fully protect the kirpan was regrettably missed in the House of Commons.

Yesterday Minister Baroness Williams said, ‘My Lords, I will now speak to the amendments regarding kirpans, and in doing so express my gratitude to the noble Lords, Lord Kennedy and Lord Singh, and my noble friend Lady Verma. They have all been tireless in their promotion of this issue; I hope that the amendments will provide an outcome satisfactory to everyone. In particular, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Singh, for his advice and to the organisation Sikhs in Politics, which has engaged positively with officials on the development of these amendments.’

She went on: ‘As noble Lords will recall, we held a round table on the issue of kirpans following the debate on these clauses in Grand Committee. This identified a gap in the current defences in that the cultural practice of gifting large ceremonial kirpans by Sikhs to eminent non-Sikhs was not covered by the “religious reasons” defence. These amendments will therefore create a defence for a person of Sikh faith to present another person with a curved sword in a religious ceremony or other ceremonial event, as covered by Section 141 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.’

Lord Singh became aware of the omission referred to by Baroness Williams towards the end of last year. He immediately contacted the Minister before the Bill came to the Lords and, following discussion, raised the issue at the second reading. Because of his standing in the Lords, he received promises of support from all sides of the House.

The Bill then moved to Grand Committee and Lord Singh spoke in detail about the religious significance of the kirpan emphasising that it literally meant ‘protector’ of the weak and vulnerable. Lord Singh briefed Labour, Liberal and others from all sides of the House to say the same. Winding up for Labour, Lord Tunnicliffe remarked that in all his years in parliament, he could never remember such unanimity.

Lord Singh’s speech at the third reading and the full debate can be read here.

The NSO is grateful to our Director Lord Singh, Lord Paddick, Lord Kennedy, Baroness Verma and unanimous support from cross-party peers to see this important amendment pass. We would also like to extend our thanks to Sikhs in Politics for their support.

[Ends]

 

, , , , , , ,

Dimbleby forgets to mention Sikhs during Cenotaph coverage

November 11th, 2018 | Posted by Singh in Current Issues | Press Releases | Sikhism - (0 Comments)

This file is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. Andrew Shiva / Wikipedia / CC BY-SA 4.0

The Network of Sikh Organisations (NSO) has requested the BBC to acknowledge a glaring omission following a segment [57:13-57:54] in its Cenotaph television coverage today in which David Dimbleby forgets to mention Sikhs amongst the 22 faith leaders in attendance for the centenary commemorations.

During the coverage of Remembrance Sunday, he said:

“There are 22 faith leaders here today”.

Dimbleby then goes through the names of faiths being represented as they appear in the footage, listing them one by one – “Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Jain, Baha’i, Mormon, Humanists and Spiritualists”. He forgot to mention Sikhs, despite our Director Lord Singh’s clear presence.

The omission which may have been inadvertent, has resulted in several complaints to the NSO. Given the size of the Sikh community in Britain, as well as the fact that today’s Remembrance Sunday commemorations marks one hundred years of the end of the Great War, we believe the inordinate contribution of Sikhs deserved recognition. To illustrate why, at the outbreak of hostilities in the Great War, 20% of soldiers in the British Indian Army were Sikhs, despite comprising less than 2% of British India’s population.

In the circumstances the NSO feels the BBC should make an urgent correction.

, , , , , ,