The last 18 months have been awful for Germany’s five and a half million Muslims and it looks like they are only going to get worse.

Making up around 6.6 percent of the population with three million citizens, negative portrayals of Muslims and Arabs play an outsized role in the media and in politics, particularly since the start of the Israel-Gaza conflict, but with very little representation in either of these spheres.

Things were already bad – an EU study on Islam in Europe last year found that Germany was the second worst country in Europe for anti-Muslim racism – but with the most right-wing Parliament in the Federal Republic’s history, many Muslims, Arabs and other minorities are worried.

The far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) scored the best result for the German far-right since World War Two at 20.8 percent, with fifty mentions of “Islam” or “Muslim” in their manifesto, none of them positive.

And though Alice Weidel has promoted herself as a “libertarian conservative”, and much has been made by Elon Musk and the international press of her lesbian marriage to a woman of color, but she also claimed that “the hijab doesn’t belong to Germany” and that Islam is incompatible with Germany’s constitution in 2017.

Though the party are going to be kept out of government by Germany’s famed “firewall” against cooperation with the far-right, Chancellor apparent Friedrich Merz of the Christian Democrats has made it clear that he is only going to accelerate Germany’s authoritarian decline, which primarily targets Arabs, Muslims and supporters of Palestine.

It does this in defense of the so-called Staatsräson, the doctrine that Israel’s security is one of Germany’s top priorities. This was initially just a rhetorical flourish by Angela Merkel on the floor of the Israeli Knesset but has since then taken on a life of its own.

After over a million went on the streets to protest his collaboration with the far-right on a vote aimed at restricting asylum Merz asked rhetorically in his final speech on the campaign trail in Munich where the pro-democracy protests were “when Palestinian flags were swung in this country.”

To Mr. Merz, showing the Palestinian flag, which is flown at the UN headquarters, is more scandalous than purposefully voting alongside a far-right party which campaigned on “remigration”.

He also recently promised to expand the law on racial incitement to make it illegal to do “deny Israel’s right to exist” – a highly controversial formulation with little basis in actual international law, and which doubtlessly will include Palestinians showing images of historic Palestine.

Germany’s case of déjà vu

One of Merz’s first moves after winning the election was to phone Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and invite him to Germany, despite the outstanding warrant from the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the war crimes of starvation as a method of warfare and of intentionally directing an attack against the civilian population.

Though Germany’s outgoing “traffic light” coalition made clear that they weren’t likely to arrest Netanyahu, they were not going to roll out the red carpet either.

Merz on the other hand considered the invitation “an open challenge against the scandalous decision of the International Criminal Court to describe the Prime Minister as a war criminal” according to Netanyahu’s office.

No wonder that only 12 percent of Germany’s Muslims voted for the victorious conservative party according to pollsters Forschungsgruppe Wahlen.

The move was condemned by Amnesty International as an “open call to break the law” and “not a good start as future chancellor” while the Left Party, who received the most votes from Muslims in this election at 29 percent criticized it sharply.

But Merz is just a particularly extreme member of the Staatsräsonquerfront, a German word I have coined to describe the alliance between far-right through to the right, center and even elements of the so-called “antideutsch” left to defend Israel at any costs, including trashing freedom of opinion and assembly, restricting citizenship rights and continuing to deliver weapons to a man wanted as a war criminal by the world’s highest court.

Under the guise of the noble goal of fighting antisemitism in the land of the Holocaust, Islam and Arabs have been turned into a problem, with German politicians failing to see the historical irony in stirring hatred against one religious and ethnic minority to supposedly protect another one, and with the far-right as steadfast allies this time around, with key pieces of legislation against “antisemitism” initially coming from or being voted for by the AfD.

After October 7, Muslims were told by liberal darling and vice chancellor Robert Habeck — now thankfully retiring from frontline politics — that their protection from right-wing extremists was conditional on distancing themselves from Hamas, considered a terror group in Germany.

Sixty eight percent of Muslims in Germany have experienced discrimination in the last five years, with a sharp rise across Europe since 2022, so this danger is hardly theoretical. Mosques have already seen numerous bomb threats and property damage to mosques, as well as hate messages, the Muslim Coordination Council (Krm) in Cologne said in late January.

“In mosque communities, people are scared that fascists will come and take us away” newly-elected Left party politician Ferat Koçak told The New Arab on election night from the Arabic district of Neukölln. Koçak became the first Left MP to ever win outside of former East Germany.

“It is very important that we give people, our friends and neighbors, the feeling of security” he said, representing a growing anti-racist wing within his party, whose revival was one of the big surprises of the election.

Protecting citizens and inhabitants is one of the key jobs of a state – an actual Staatsräson– and should never be conditional on what people believe. We’ve seen Germany go down that route before, and it did not end well.

Source: The New Arab

Senate to debate and vote the bill this week.

New law would exacerbate the blatant religious, racial and gender discrimination already experienced by Muslim women in France.

French lawmakers must reject a discriminatory bill that would ban the wearing of “ostensibly religious” clothing and symbols during competitions in all French sports, Amnesty International said ahead of this week’s Senate debate and vote.

The ban which would apply to competitions organized by sports federations, their decentralized bodies, professional leagues and affiliated associations as well as swimming pools, is being debated today and tomorrow ahead of an expected vote.

Anna Błuś, Amnesty International’s Researcher on Gender Justice in Europe, said:

“At the Paris Olympics, France’s ban on French women athletes who wear headscarves from competing at the Games drew international outrage. Just six months on, French authorities are not only doubling down on the discriminatory hijab ban but are attempting to extend it to all sports.“Under the guise of implementing the notion of ‘secularism’, these laws in reality target and disproportionately impact the rights of Muslim women and girls who will be excluded from competing in all sports if they wear a hijab or any other religious clothing.“To equate the wearing of a headscarf with “an attack on secularism” is not only absurd but dangerous and would only serve to create division this proposed law purports to want to tackle. This law would exacerbate the blatant religious, racial and gender discrimination already experienced by Muslim women in France.“All women have the right to choose what to wear. The sports hijab bans in France are yet another measure underpinned by Islamophobia and a patriarchal attempt to control what Muslim women wear. This bill must be rejected”

“Laïcité”, or “secularism”, which is theoretically embedded in the French constitution to protect everyone’s religious freedom, has often been used as a pretext to block Muslim women’s access to public spaces in France. Over several years, the French authorities have enacted laws and policies to regulate Muslim women’s and girls’ clothing, in discriminatory ways. Sport federations have followed suit, imposing hijab bans in several sports. 

Damaging impact of hijab ban in French sport

In the run up to the 2024 Olympic Games, Amnesty published findings setting out the damaging impact of hijab bans in sports on women and girls in France and exposing how the bans contradict the clothing rules of international sport bodies.

The research looked at rules in 38 European countries and found that France is the only one that has imposed bans on religious headwear in sports. It found that preventing Muslim women and girls from fully and freely participating in sports can have devastating impacts on all aspects of their lives, including on their mental and physical health.  

In October 2024, United Nations experts condemned these bans as “disproportionate and discriminatory” and called for their reversal. But instead of addressing these pressing concerns, French authorities are now attempting to expand their restrictions to Muslim women’s participation in sports through this bill.

As well as banning religious clothing, the bill would also prohibit prayers from taking place in any sports facilities or grounds and introduce a requirement for sports educators to undergo “administrative investigations…prior to the issuance of the sports educator’s professional card”.

Haïfa Tlili, sociologist and co-founder of Basket Pour Toutes, told Amnesty International:

“There is no objective data to justify decisions that severely restrict the freedoms of Muslim female licence-holders who decide to wear sports headgear. It is therefore incorrect and unjustified to assert that the rules which exclude Muslim sportswomen and girls are necessary, appropriate and proportionate for the proper functioning of public service.”

Basketball player and another Basket Pour Toutes co-founder, Hélène Bâ, described how hijab bans force Muslim women to make an impossible choice.

“This new law would have appalling consequences for Muslim women and girls: humiliation, stigmatisation, trauma, withdrawal from sport, breakdown of social ties, loss of self-confidence, disappearance of women’s teams, endangerment of clubs.”

The explanatory note to the bill says that the “neutrality” requirement as interpreted in French law extends to employees and volunteers of sports federations, for instance coaches and referees and even “high level athletes”.

According to a report accompanying the bill, this legislation has been prompted by “growing attacks on secularism” and the need to address reports of “radicalization”, “communitarianism” and “Islamist separatism” in French sports. It argues that banning clothing such as sports hijabs would prevent the formation of “counter-societies”.

By placing the wearing of a headscarf on the spectrum of “attacks on secularism”, which range from “permissiveness” to “terrorism”, this legislation, if passed, would fuel racism and reinforce the growing hostile environment facing Muslims and those perceived to be Muslim in France. Indeed, framing headscarves as a security threat or singling them out as a symbol of women’s oppression is imbued with negative and discriminatory stereotypes that are endemic to the “othering” of Muslim women because of their religion.

Political disagreement on the merits of the bill

The proposal was submitted to the Senate on 5 March 2024 by Senator Michel Savin after being debated in the Standing Commission on Cultural, Educational, Communication and Sports Affairs, revealing deep disagreements between senators on the merits of the bill. A previous attempt to ban religious headwear in all sports at the national level was rejected by the Senate in February 2022.

Source: Amnesty International 

“I don’t know what Legault is picking on. It seems to me that it’s always Muslims,” he said on Tuesday.

Miller, who called for respect for freedom of expression and religion, was asked to react to Legault’s announcement on Friday to “Islamists” that he might use the notwithstanding clause to ban prayer in public places such as parks.

“It was a comment he made from Notre-Dame, wasn’t it? (…) Ah, he wasn’t in the middle of mass,” Miller began ironically.
He pointed out that “it’s ironic” that his comments on secularism came just a few hours before Legault was due to attend the inauguration of the famous Paris cathedral, an “immensely religious” place.

“People have the right to pray in public, whether you’re Jewish, whether you’re on a pilgrimage to Saint-Joseph’s oratory as you see (…) especially in summer, people climbing the stairs on their knees, Christians. Would that be banned?” he asked, questioning the way in which such a provision would be applied.

Federal Justice Minister Arif Virani, for his part, said that this was only “speculation” since Legault had not tabled a bill.
“Basically, I believe that the rights of any Quebecer are the same under the Canadian Charter as those of any Canadian. That includes the right to practice their religion,” he added.

Justin Trudeau’s political lieutenant for Quebec, Jean-Yves Duclos, also explained that we will have to see “what Legault has in mind.”
“It’s clear that a number of people are raising questions about fundamental freedoms, but before we can make any further pronouncements, we need more details from Legault,” he said.

Legault made his comments last Friday on the last day of the parliamentary session in Quebec City. He explained that he would “fight” to defend Quebec’s fundamental values, such as “secularism and equality between men and women,” and said he was annoyed to see people praying “on their knees in the street.”

Source: CTV News

Germany’s leading human rights organization has warned of increasing anti-Muslim racism amid heightened Middle East tensions, urging politicians and media to avoid harmful generalizations.

The German Institute for Human Rights (DIMR) released on Monday a 32-page report examining the Gaza conflict’s impact on democracy and human rights, focusing primarily on rising antisemitism but also concerns over increased anti-Muslim incidents.

DIMR Director Beate Rudolf pointed out that overgeneralizations and negative stereotypes about Muslims in political discourse and media coverage following the Palestinian group Hamas’ October 7, 2023 attack have had a negative impact on basic rights and freedoms.

“Anyone who criticizes the Israeli government is not automatically acting antisemitic. Anyone who advocates for a separate state for the Palestinians is not automatically a Hamas sympathizer. Generalizations only promote antisemitism, as well as racism against Palestinians and Muslims,” she told a press conference in Berlin.

The report showed that antisemitic incidents in Germany have surged since Oct. 7, 2023, with hate crimes doubling to 5,164 cases in 2023, compared with the previous year.

More than half of these offences occurred in the final quarter. The first half of 2024 saw 1,997 antisemitic crimes reported to police.

Preventive Measures

DIMR called for stronger civic engagement to counter antisemitism in Germany, expanding preventive measures such as awareness-raising programs in educational institutions and providing support for projects that combat misinformation and conspiracy theories.

The institute also cautioned authorities against making overgeneralizations and spreading negative stereotypes about Muslims, emphasizing that restrictions on freedom of expression and assembly should only be implemented in exceptional situations as permitted by law.

“The bans on demonstrations described as ‘pro-Palestinian’ in the months after October 7, 2023 made it difficult for people, especially people with a Palestinian family history, to publicly express their grief for the many civilian victims in Gaza and their solidarity with the civilian population there and to demand an end to the war, and an independent Palestinian state,” the report said.

DIMR experts pointed out that German media and politicians often overlooked the fact that Israeli Jews also attended some of these protests, advocating for the rights and concerns of both sides.

“The term ‘pro-Palestinian’ used in the bans and taken up by politicians and the media promoted a blanket equation of Palestinians with antisemitic, pro-violence Hamas supporters. This public perception and the focus of social debates on violent demonstrations strengthened existing racism against Palestinians and people who are perceived as Arab or Muslim,” the experts have noted.

Source: TRT World

Article by Imaan Khan

Islamophobia Awareness Month (IAM) is upon us once again. During these weeks, the pervasive and worrying issues of workplace discrimination, street violence, riots and hate crime impacting the Muslim community are all brought to the fore. However, what we often find is that the root causes, that is the structural nature of Islamophobia, tends to regularly receive less attention.

Consequently, even less discussion is allocated to exposing how this facilitates and manufactures consent for the ongoing genocide in Gaza. This pervasive issue creates conditions that have allowed many in positions of power to either remain silent or openly commend the killing of thousands in Palestine.

Given it is the second IAM that takes place amid the ongoing genocide in Palestine, highlighting what Israel has been doing to Palestinians and how this links to the oppression of Muslims more widely, is all the more important to what the month is supposed to serve.

Threads of Oppression

Islamophobia is systemically entrenched and fundamentally rooted in spaces of political power, where policies and narratives are crafted. Limiting the discussions during IAM to hate crime statistics and street-level incidents can distract from its pervasive nature and prominence within the British political landscape.

The PREVENT (CVE) strategy is an example of how those in power have shaped the way that citizens interact with and perceive Islam. This dynamic reached its peak during the War on Terror, which served as a critical driver of global Islamophobia, supported by significant political and economic capital.

High-level discussions across political institutions and the media focused on distinguishing between “good” and “bad” Muslims, a tactic used to divide as well as police these communities. The creation of this binary, along with the punitive measures waged against those deemed “bad,” has been driven by a highly securitized and sensationalized discourse.

Muslims have since been increasingly portrayed as suspicious, which in turn has served to desensitize the public to the political violence being enacted on Muslims abroad under the guise of fighting terror.

Since October 7, we have witnessed these binaries playing out. From Palestinians facing ethnic cleansing being collectively represented as terrorists (or potential terrorists), to protestors being painted as sympathizers of terror for denouncing the assaults on Gaza. The aggressive targeting and even criminalization of solidarity efforts from the UK to Germany has shown that the definition of “good” amongst European states, is becoming increasingly narrow over time.

The demonization of those condemning the genocide and exercising their rights to freedom of expression and assembly, is being used to increase the repression of all across the Western continent. Indeed, one only has to look at the cases of Majid Freeman in the UK, Elias d’Imzalene in France, and the treatment of organizations like Samidoun in Canada, Germany and the US to see how pervasive this attacks on freedoms is becoming. And of course, all of the cases made against these prominent activists are rooted in Islamophobic rhetoric.

Islamophobia in Britain

The UK has regularly demonstrated how entrenched Islamophobia is. This past summer we witnessed in horror as over 25 Islamophobic and anti-immigrant riots spilled out onto the streets nationwide, marking the most significant unrest since 2011.

These violent events revealed how normalized Islamophobia has become in the UK and how it has been allowed to fester for decades. Yet, instead of alarm being raised by the government, their response was notably dismissive. Both elected officials and the British media avoided using the term Islamophobia to describe the motivations of rioters, and they failed to address the root causes behind the violence entirely.

Worse still, in the wake of the anti-Muslim riots, prominent figures such as the Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, called for the revision and strengthening of counter-extremism policies such as Prevent, disregarding the reality that this would only exacerbate Islamophobia and the criminalization of dissent. Not to mention, it would further marginalize Muslim communities.

Another recent example of the widespread Islamophobia that exists is MP Zara Sultana’s interview on Good Morning Britain. Her experience illustrated how readily the oppression of Muslims is downplayed in public discourse, with presenter Kate Garraway questioning Sultana on why the term Islamophobia is even necessary if words like ‘racist’ and ‘thuggery’ have already been used.

The resistance to naming Islamophobia, even when it threatens the country’s internal stability, reflects the extent to which it has become acceptable by both the state and media.

When viewers see prominent political figures and media personalities ignoring, justifying, or even encouraging violence against Muslims abroad—particularly in Palestine—it legitimizes the use of violence against Muslims at home.

Manufacturing Consent

Dehumanization has been a prerequisite for genocide. While this is starkly evident in Israeli discourse, it also occurs within our own borders in the UK. It is the result of decades of persistent dehumanization of Muslims that the killing of Palestinians has been allowed to take place with little opposition from those in power.

Labelling the people of Palestine with Islamophobic and racist tropes decontextualizes their resistance, framing them within an outdated narrative that suggests a primitive desire for violence as a driving force, rather than justice and liberation. Such portrayals depict Muslims as unruly and in need of control, creating justifications for the use of violence against them.

Furthermore, the murder of thousands of Palestinians is downplayed in an attempt to eliminate any potential lingering scrutiny in the minds of the public. We only have to look at how the killing of children is reported, like six-year old Hind Rajab who was referred to by a CNN reporter as a ‘woman killed in Gaza’ while Israeli soldiers are referred to in a since edited Sky News headline as ‘teenage victims’. These representations of violence lay bare the extent to which Islamophobic narratives, grounded in War on Terror rhetoric, are used amidst genocidal violence.

To effectively address Islamophobia, community focus and efforts must go towards dismantling the War on Terror and counterterrorism laws and policies. This involves standing firm against intimidation, knowing our rights, and continuing to advocate for Palestine without restriction.

Finally, we cannot uproot Islamophobia by collaborating with the very institutions that sustain it. We must speak truth to power and organize to defend our communities independently of the state. We must hold the media accountable for misrepresentation and the normalization of the injustice Muslims are constantly subjected to. We must prioritize the root causes of Islamophobia, rather than merely addressing its symptoms.

Source: The New Arab

Rasmus Paludan, the founder of a small political party, was sentenced to four months in prison for agitation against Muslims, the Malmo district court said.

A citizen of both Denmark and Sweden, Paludan has several times set Islam’s holy book on fire in public, on occasion also draping it in bacon, causing outrage among Muslims at home and abroad.

While burning religious texts in itself is permitted under Sweden’s far-reaching freedom of speech legislation, agitation against an ethnic or national group, such as insulting and offending Muslims, can be a violation of the law.

Paludan was charged with making lewd remarks about Islam and Muslims as well as about counter-demonstrators.

“The court makes the assessment that at the gatherings (Paludan) expressed disrespect towards, among others, Muslims, and that his actions can’t be excused as criticism of Islam or as political campaigning,” the ruling said.

Paludan, 42, who was also convicted in Denmark on similar charges in 2020, had pleaded not guilty. His lawyer said he would appeal.

The Swedish government, fearing that Koran burnings by Paludan and others could trigger attacks by Islamist extremists, is considering making it possible for police to deny permission for public gatherings if they threaten national security.

Denmark last year tightened legislation to ban public Koran burnings outright.

Paludan’s political party has failed to win any seats in elections in either Denmark or Sweden.

Source: Reuters

Crown prosecutors have dropped assault and harassment charges against a woman who pulled the hijab of a protester at a pro-Palestinian demonstration in Ottawa in May, saying it needed to balance the public interest in prosecution and the reasonable prospect of conviction.

As part of the reasoning given for withdrawing charges on Thursday, assistant Crown attorney Moiz Karimjee said the Crown considered a number of factors, including that the victim was chanting “From the River to the Sea Palestine will be Free,” which he said could be reasonably inferred to be “a call for genocide of the Jewish people.”

Karimjee noted Hayfa Abdelkhaleq was chanting the phrase outside Ottawa City Hall on May 14 when Lorna Bernbaum approached her and pulled her hijab.

Bernbaum was on her way to a celebration of Israel’s Independence Day when she encountered Abdelkhaleq, who was waving a Palestinian flag and protesting Israel’s assault on Gaza.

Video showed Bernbaum, 74, giving the middle finger to the camera before she pulled down Abdelkhaleq’s headscarf, revealing her hair.

Abdelkhaleq responded by shouting, “Shame, shame on you,” as Bernbaum walked away.

Following an investigation by the Ottawa Police Service’s hate crime and bias unit, Bernbaum was charged with criminal harassment by threatening conduct, assault and mischief.

Accused’s actions ‘a serious offence,’ Crown says

In an 11-point statement read to Justice Trevor Brown, Karimjee characterized Bernbaum’s actions as “a serious offence against law and order.”

He also noted that in her victim impact statement, Abdelkhaleq said her life had been turned upside down by the assault. She left both her job and the country as she didn’t feel safe.

“When I think about coming back to Canada, my body shakes,” said Abdelkhaleq, who is a Canadian citizen.

The assault also affected the sense of safety and belonging of other members of Canada’s Arab, Palestinian and Muslim communities, Karimjee said.

Right to protest not absolute

But he also said Abdelkhaleq’s constitutionally protected right to protest was not absolute. Specifically, the Crown cited her use of the chant as “problematic.”

“Chants at a protest cannot call for genocide of a people,” Karimjee said. “While some give this phrase a peaceful meaning, an equally reasonable inference is that it is a call for genocide of the Jewish people.

“Anyone chants this at his or her own peril because if additional evidence in a particular case establishes a genocidal intent, the person could be charged criminally.”

He said it took the use of the chant into account in the Crown’s reasoning for withdrawing charges because of the “duty to assess the public interest having regard to all the circumstances.”

“The fact is that [the chant] is perceived by many Jewish and non-Jewish persons as being a call for genocide of Jews. It sounds counter-intuitive to protest a perceived genocide of Palestinians while using a phrase where one interpretation is a call for genocide of the Jewish people.”

Accused admitted wrongdoing, offered apology

Karimjee also noted that Abdelkhaleq, who says many of her friends and relatives have been killed in Gaza, has a right to protest “what she perceived to be the Israeli occupation and genocide of the Palestinian people.”

Several UN Security Council Resolutions and the Canadian government recognize the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal.

Moreover, Karimjee said, having her head scarf pulled down “violated her personal safety, sense of belonging to Canada and dignity.”

But the Crown accepted that Bernbaum had made amends since the incident by admitting her wrongdoing, conveying an apology to Abdelkhaleq via the Crown and offering a restitution payment. She also spoke with a Muslim community representative to understand the significance of the hijab to Muslim women, and the importance of the right to protest.

He also noted she had no prior criminal record and this was the first time she was arrested and charged.

Karimjee said Abdelhaleq was supportive of the Crown withdrawing charges.

‘I’m not happy’

When contacted by CBC on Thursday however, Abdelhaleq said she had felt pressured to agree to the Crown withdrawing charges and felt that if she did not, she could face action herself.

“I’m not happy. I’m just really shocked,” she said.

She deplored Karimjee’s characterization of her chanting as being open to interpretation as a call to genocide.

“Oh my God, I can’t believe that,” she said, comparing it to being told there is no right to chant “Free Canada.”

Hearing the way Karimjee characterized her chanting had the same impact on her as the initial assault, she said.

“Like I have no right to say ‘freedom,’ I have no right to say ‘peace,'” she said. “I’m just saying it.”

Abdelhaleq said there’s no comparison between her words and the actions of Israel in Gaza, where she said her family was being bombed.

“I’m calling for freedom, basically,” she said. “I didn’t touch anyone, I didn’t hate anyone.”

The Crown’s decision made her doubt whether she would return to Canada, she said: “Maybe I have no right as a Muslim woman to be in Canada.”

Charges withdrawn

But in court on, Justice Trevor Brown thanked Karimjee for his efforts “balancing the complex realities of this case.”

Addressing Bernbaum, Brown said: “I will mark those charges as withdrawn and you are free to go.”

Bernbaum declined comment to CBC.

Criminal lawyer Michael Spratt, who was not involved in the case, said it was “dangerous” for Crown attorneys to comment on the meaning of protest chants.

“I think the Crown — who are lawyers for His Majesty the King — need to be very careful about wading into what slogans mean, especially in situations as complicated as Middle East peace,” he told CBC.

Source: CBC News

In a statement, it said the IZH had acted as a direct representative of Iran’s Shi’ite Muslim Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and sought to bring about an Islamic revolution in Germany to impose theocratic rule.

The IZH was not available for comment by phone on Wednesday morning, and its website was not accessible to the public.

Iran’s foreign ministry said it had summoned the German ambassador in Tehran on Wednesday in protest at the ban.

“Unfortunately what happened in Germany is an example of Islamophobia and is in opposition to the teachings of the Abrahamic faiths,” it said on X, referencing Islam, Christianity and Judaism. The ministry said the ban violated freedom of expression and promoted violence and extremism.

Asked about the summoning of the ambassador, a German foreign ministry source said that it was up to the Iranian side to take concrete steps towards improving ties between the two countries that have been downgraded in recent years.

The German interior ministry said 53 of the IZH’s premises had been searched early on Wednesday in eight German states by investigators acting on a court order.

In addition to the Hamburg-based IZH, which includes one of the oldest mosques in Germany known for its turquoise exterior, subsidiaries in Frankfurt, Munich and Berlin were also banned, with four Shi’ite mosques to be closed, said the ministry.

The interior ministry said evidence from an earlier search of 55 properties conducted in November provided the basis for Wednesday’s ban of the IZH, known in German as Islamisches Zentrum Hamburg.

“Today, we banned the Islamisches Zentrum Hamburg, which promotes an Islamist-extremist, totalitarian ideology in Germany,” said Interior Minister Nancy Faeser.

“This Islamist ideology is opposed to human dignity, women’s rights, an independent judiciary and our democratic government.”

She said she wanted to make clear “this ban absolutely does not apply to the peaceful practice of the Shi’ite religion”.

A 2020 report on Islamic life in Germany said there were about 5.5 million Muslims in Germany’s 83 million population.

The interior ministry also accused the IZH of promoting antisemitism and the Iran-backed Lebanese militant group Hezbollah, which is also banned in Germany and classified as a terrorist organization by the European Union.

Source: Reuters

The French league had dedicated this matchday to promote its initiative against homophobia.

This is not the first instance of Mohamed facing consequences for this stance; a similar incident occurred last year when he refused to wear the LGBTQ+ themed jersey against Toulouse and was fined.

Despite the controversy, Mohamed has had an impressive season, scoring eight goals in 29 appearances for Nantes.

Source: AboutIslam.net

The Swedish authorities have granted permission to yet another protest involving the burning of the Quran, the Muslim holy book.

Police in southern Sweden’s Malmo issued the permit for the controversial protest to take place at the city’s Gustavs Adolfs Torg public square Friday, national broadcaster SVT Nyheter said Thursday.

The authorities, meanwhile, were yet to decide on two more applications for similar protests this week, one in central Malmo on Saturday and another in Rosengard on Sunday, according to the broadcaster.

Quran-burning protests in Sweden have strained Stockholm’s diplomatic relations with several countries.

The Organization for Islamic Cooperation (OIC), for instance, called on members to take political and economic measures against Sweden, Denmark, and other countries that allowed the burning and desecration of the Muslim holy book.

Such demonstrations in Sweden and Denmark, under the pretext of free speech, have also sparked angry protests and attacks on diplomatic missions in Muslim-majority countries.

In response, Denmark adopted a law last December that makes it illegal to burn copies of the Quran in public places.

Sweden is also considering legal options that would allow police to bar similar protests over national security concerns.

The OIC has warned that it is necessary to stop acts that can be characterized as “aggression that spreads hatred and contempt for religions and threatens global peace, security, and harmony.”

Meanwhile, Friday’s controversial protest comes just as Malmo prepares to host the Eurovision Song Contest week.

“Right now, we are in a situation where we need, as a precautionary measure, to ensure that we have the skills and tools close at hand in the event of a serious incident,” head of Malmo Police Petra Stenkula said last month at a press conference on the security situation during Eurovision.

Security has also been heightened amid Israel’s participation in the contest, despite calls to ban the country over its war on Gaza which has killed over 34,500 Palestinians, mostly women and children, with tens of thousands of others wounded.

Swedish authorities have requested extra measures, including heavily armed police and reinforcements from two other Nordic countries, Denmark and Norway.

Over 20,000 people from various European countries will reportedly descend on Malmo to protest Israel’s participation in the song contest that begins on May 7.

Malmo, Sweden’s third-largest city, has a diverse population of over 360,000 people of 186 different nationalities, including a large Muslim community.

In 2022, the city saw large demonstrations and riots after a Quran-burning protest by Swedish-Danish far-right politician Rasmus Paludan.

Source: Anadolu Agency