Charges against man who burnt Koran ‘incorrectly worded'

Telegraph

09-05-2025

Prosecutors have rewritten charges against a man for burning a copy of the Koran after being accused of resurrecting the offence of blasphemy 'by the backdoor'.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has amended the charge against Hamit Coskun, 50, who set fire to a copy of the Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London so that he is no longer accused of harassing the 'religious institution of Islam'.
MPs and lawyers had claimed the phrase was tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy offence and 'plainly defective' as the 'religious institution of Islam' was not a person under the Public Order Act through which Mr Coskun was being charged.
Blasphemy was abolished as a common law offence in England and Wales in 2008 and there is a growing campaign within Parliament to block any attempt to reintroduce it despite calls from some campaigners.
Now, the CPS has admitted the original wording of the charge was 'incorrectly applied' and it has substituted a new charge to 'more accurately reflect the alleged offence'.
But it maintained that it believed Mr Coskun had committed a criminal offence because his actions caused distress, harassment and alarm, which is a crime, and was motivated by hostility towards members of a religious group.
Mr Coskun has said his action was a protest against Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the president of Turkey, and an act of solidarity with Salwan Momika – an Iraqi refugee who was assassinated in Sweden in January after burning Korans in repeated public protests.
The updated charge alleges he used disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress' by burning a copy of the Koran.
It further alleged he held it aloft while he shouted, 'F--- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'Koran is burning', and 'at the time of doing so, and in doing so, he was motivated (wholly or partly) by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'.
Robert Jenrick, the shadow justice secretary who wrote to the inspectorate for the CPS to express his concerns, welcomed the decision to drop reference to the 'religious institution of Islam'.
'This was an invention that had no basis in law. It should not have required our campaign to force the CPS to change course,' he said.
'The updated charging decision by the CPS is still extremely concerning. Most people would condemn desecrating a religious text, but we live in a free country where people should be free to criticise and mock religion. We must resist any attempts to introduce blasphemy laws by the back door.'
The National Secular Society has written to the CPS urging it to drop the prosecution of Coskun. It said the burning of the Koran was clearly an act of political protest – a type of expression protected under Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, which guarantees the right to freedom of speech.
Stephen Evans, the chief executive of the National Secular Society, which is providing legal support to the defendant, said the prosecution amounted to a 'dangerous reintroduction of blasphemy laws through the backdoor'.
'We've raised concerns with the CPS, the Home Secretary, and the Attorney General, urging an urgent reevaluation of these flawed and ludicrous charges,' he added.
'The burning of a Koran, however offensive to some, was in this instance a legitimate form of political protest, protected under human rights law. Proceeding with charge would not only undermine free speech but also set a perilous precedent, effectively reintroducing blasphemy laws that were abolished in 2008.'
Last year, the Government explicitly ruled out reintroducing blasphemy laws, after Labour MP Tahir Ali asked Prime Minister Keir Starmer to 'commit to introducing measures to prohibit the desecration of all religious texts and prophets of the Abrahamic religions'.
In February, the Government also committed to protecting the right to free expression as part of efforts to challenge anti-Muslim bigotry, stating that 'no blasphemy laws will be introduced by this government'