The aim of the new definition is to reduce Islamophobia, but it has faced backlash over concerns it could contradict free speech.

Following an FOI request from The Times, the EHRC said that during an “informal discussion with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, the question of whether the Commission would consider adopting the definition was raised.”

Baroness Falkner of Margravine, who headed the watchdog from 2020 until November of last year, has accused Labour of pursuing the definition to win over the Muslim vote.

Baroness Falkner told The Times: “The reports that the government has secretly tried to get the EHRC -– the regulator for freedom of expression — to sign up to its entirely unworkable ‘definition’ shows how ideological they are. They have been warned again and again that this definition will restrict speech and legitimate criticism of a religion or culture.

“They didn’t consult EHRC, which has responsibility for protecting our hard won freedoms and which repeatedly warned them of the implications of this definition.

“If they really want to restrict our freedom of expression, they should come up with a proper legal definition and see if they can get that through parliament, instead of adopting underhand tactics, presumably in pursuit of a Muslim vote which they have, for far too long, taken for granted.”

Baroness Falkner of Margravine has blasted Labour for its decision

| PA

The Government’s revised definition for Islamophobia includes “discrimination on the basis of being Muslim or perceived to be Muslim” as well as negative characterisations as a collective group with the intention to cause hatred against them.

The Government did not formally invite the EHRC to submit its views to a call for evidence undertaken by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government’s working group, who were tasked with drafting the decision last year; instead, they invited select groups to contribute their views.

The Government has refused to confirm which groups were invited to submit evidence.

MHCLG has since stated it has deleted all submissions.

Labour did not consult with the EHCR despite it being their statutory duty to advise on religious discrimination

 | GETTY

Last year, the EHRC warned that the government’s approach was risking unlawful territory because it had bypassed the EHRC’s statutory duty to advise on religious discrimination.

Lord Young of Acton, director of the Free Speech Union, said: “Reading between the lines, it looks as though the government’s adoption of a definition of anti-Muslim hostility was just the latest move in Labour’s long-standing effort to get the EHRC to investigate the Conservative Party for ‘Islamophobia’. So nothing to do with protecting Muslims and all about political point-scoring.”

A spokesman for MHCLG said the interpretation was “completely misleading.”

He said: “The definition is not mandatory and there was no attempt to lobby the EHRC to adopt it.

“It is for individual organisations to decide whether and how the definition may be useful in their particular context to help tackle rising anti-Muslim hostility.”

A spokesman for the EHRC said: “This topic raised complex issues relevant to equality and human rights, and as the independent regulator we provided advice to the Chair of the Working Group and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government.

“When the UK government launched its non-statutory definition of anti-Muslim hostility it encouraged adoption across the public, private and third sectors. The question of whether the EHRC would adopt the definition was raised during an informal discussion with the department.

“We welcome the government’s commitment to keep the definition under regular review and have offered our support in the development of any detailed, sector-specific guidance”.