Which UK Muslim organisations have public policies supporting LGBTQ+ inclusion and women's rights?

1. LGBTQ+ Muslim organisations that explicitly champion inclusion

Imaan (founded 1999) and Hidayah are the clearest, repeatedly cited examples of UK Muslim organisations whose public mission is supporting LGBTQ+ Muslims: Imaan is described as “the UK's leading LGBTQ Muslim Charity” and provides peer support, campaigning and Pride participation ^{[1] [8] [3] [9]}, while Hidayah runs support groups across UK cities and campaigns for visibility and social justice for LGBTQI+ Muslims ^{[2] [4]}. Multiple resource lists and LGBTQ+ community directories also signpost these groups as dedicated services for queer Muslims ^{[10] [11]}.

2. Broader LGBTQ+ & faith-bridging groups referenced by health and community services

NHS and community listings that advise LGBTQ+ patients and clients point to Imaan and related projects (for example Safra Project for Muslim LBT women), indicating institutional recognition of those groups as providers of faith-sensitive LGBTQ+ support ^[11]. Third‑sector partners such as Naz and Matt Foundation publicly ally with Imaan and LGBTQ+ Muslim causes, showing cross-community solidarity ^[12].

3. Women’s-rights organisations within and about Muslim communities

Muslim Women’s Network UK appears centrally in coverage on policy for Muslim women: it operates a helpline and led a Muslim Women’s Manifesto calling for safety, inclusion and visible allyship ^{[5] [6]}. Parliamentary and civil-society submissions and reports—cited in the search set—treat gendered Islamophobia and Muslim women’s rights as policy priorities, reflecting advocacy from Muslim women’s organisations ^{[7] [13]}.

4. Policy debates and contested terrain: Sharia councils, rights and protections

Academic and policy reporting highlights tension around religious dispute-resolution forums (Sharia councils) and women’s legal protection. Some sources argue these bodies can disadvantage Muslim women on family law matters, while noting UK courts and legal mechanisms remain the ultimate arbiter—this frames why some women’s-rights groups press for legal reform and clearer safeguards ^{[14] [15]}. The existence of these debates shows that “women’s rights” within Muslim communities is not monolithic: there are competing priorities between protecting religious practice and preventing gendered harms ^{[14] [15]}.

5. Where sources are explicit — and where they are silent

Available reporting and directories clearly name Imaan and Hidayah as UK groups with public, pro‑inclusion missions for LGBTQ+ Muslims ^{[1] [2] [4] [3]}. The Muslim Women’s Network UK is explicitly active on women’s rights policy and runs a helpline ^{[5] [6]}. Available sources do not mention explicit LGBTQ+ inclusion policies for mainstream UK mosque bodies or national Muslim representative councils in this dataset; they also do not provide comprehensive lists of all UK Muslim organisations’ internal equality policies—such statements are not found in current reporting (not found in current reporting).

6. Competing viewpoints and implicit agendas to note

Sources documenting Sharia councils and gender rights often come from academic or policy critiques that emphasise potential discrimination against women and call for reform or legal oversight ^{[14] [15]}. Other reporting and community voices push back against “saviour” narratives and warn that state-led interventions can stigmatise Muslim communities or instrumentalise women’s rights for securitised agendas ^{[16] [17]}. Readers should therefore treat advocacy for reform and for religious accommodation as distinct but overlapping agendas in this debate ^{[14] [17]}.

7. Practical next steps if you want verifiable policy texts

To confirm an organisation’s formal policy statements, consult its own website or governing documents (charity pages, equality and safeguarding policies). The links and directories in available sources point to Imaan and Hidayah for LGBTQ+ Muslim support, and to MWNUK for Muslim women’s advocacy; follow those organisational pages for explicit policy texts and contact details ^{[1] [2] [5]}.

Limitations: this analysis uses only the supplied search results and therefore cannot assert the absence of policies beyond what those sources report; several mainstream Muslim institutions’ positions are not covered in the provided material (not found in current reporting).