Anti-Islamic beliefs not protected under Equality Act 2010

Under the Equality Act 2010 employees are protected against discrimination on grounds of ‘religion or belief’. What is considered a ‘protected belief’ can often be contentious. When making decisions about protected beliefs, tribunals are guided by the principles set out by the Employment Appeal Tribunal in Grainger v Nicholson.

A recent case involved a ‘belief’ in English nationalism

In Thomas v Surrey and Borders Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, Mr Thomas said that he’d been dismissed because of his belief in English nationalism.

Is English Nationalism a protected belief?

As a preliminary issue, the employment tribunal considered whether his belief was a ‘protected belief’ under Equality Act 2010.

The tribunal held that, although many aspects of his belief in English nationalism would have been found to be protected by Equality Act 2010, however his belief included anti-Islamic beliefs. In fact, he believed that there was no place in British society for Muslims or Islam itself and that Muslims should be forcibly deported from the UK.

Racist and xenophobic sentiment falls foul of the fifth criteria from Grainger v Nicholson, which says that the belief:

• must be worthy of respect in a democratic society,
• must not be incompatible with human dignity,
• must not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.

Anti-Islamic beliefs are not protected.

What happened next?

Mr Thomas appealed.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal agreed with the tribunal. UK law had to be interpreted, insofar as possible, in accordance with the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention).

Article 17 of the Convention states that a person cannot claim the protection of the Convention where to do so would allow the performance of any act “aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms” set out in the Convention. The EAT noted that forcible deportation of Muslims from the United Kingdom would undoubtedly amount to the destruction of their Convention rights. In short, it found that his beliefs amounted to “hate speech” which is not protected under Equality Act 2010.