Man who burned Quran outside Turkish consulate in London guilty of religiously aggravated public order offence
Giving his verdict, District Judge McGarva said: 'Your actions in burning the Quran where you did were highly provocative, and your actions were accompanied by bad language in some cases directed toward the religion and were motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
2 days ago
- Spectator
This is a dangerous moment for free speech
Britain without blasphemy laws is a surprisingly recent development. Blasphemy was abolished as a common law offence in England and Wales only in 2008 and in Scotland in 2021. But that was the final burial of a law dead for much longer. The last execution for the crime was in 1697; the last imprisonment in 1921; and the last successful trial in 1977 – Mary Whitehouse's prosecution of Gay News for publishing a poem about a centurion's rape of Christ's corpse. Even if 11 local councils banned Monty Python's Life of Brian two years later, the trend since has been towards trusting that the Almighty is big enough to fend for himself. Yet this week the clock seemed to have been turned back to around ad 650. Hamit Coskun was convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence motivated 'by hostility towards… followers of Islam'. His crime? Setting fire to a Quran, shouting 'fuck Islam' and declaring the faith a 'religion of terrorism' outside the Turkish consulate. The Crown argued Coskun's demonstration could not have been peaceful, since it provoked a Muslim man to attack him. The alternative explanation – that Coskun had, in a rather regrettable way, proved his main point, eluded the professionals of Lord Hermer's Crown Prosecution Service. Coskun was originally charged with the exciting new crime of harassing the 'religious institution of Islam' – treating a faith with 1.9 billion followers like someone with hurt feelings. Although that charge was not pursued, the eventual ruling's impact is effectively the same. Henceforth, anyone criticising a religion is at the mercy of the tender sensibilities of any bystanders.
Spectator
2 days ago
- Spectator
Why I burnt the Quran
My name is Hamit Coskun and I've just been convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence. My 'crime'? Burning a copy of the Quran outside the Turkish consulate in London. Moments later, I was attacked in full view of the street by a man. I was hospitalised. Then I was arrested. Some may say that book-burning is a poor substitute for reasoned debate. I would counter that it was a symbolic, non-violent form of expression intended to draw attention to the ongoing move from the secularism of my country of birth to a regime which embraces hardline Islam. As I told Westminster Magistrates' Court, what I did constituted political protest and the law, as I understood it, was on my side. CPS guidance makes clear that legitimate protest can be offensive and on occasion must be, if it is to be effective. In that spirit, Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights protects not just polite speech but speech that offends, shocks or disturbs. Political expression, above all, is meant to enjoy the strongest protection. Alas, the judge ruled otherwise. And the reasoning deployed to convict me raises troubling questions, not only about the scope of public order law but about whether Britain is witnessing the quiet return of blasphemy laws. Although the man who assaulted me is being prosecuted separately, the Crown says his action helped to prove my guilt. It argued that because I was attacked, my behaviour must not have been peaceful. Under this logic, 'disorderly' no longer depends on conduct, but on how offended or aggressive someone else chooses to be in response.
Spectator
4 days ago
- Spectator
Brace yourselves for more Quran-burning trials in Britain
You might well have felt slightly repelled if last February you had passed someone ineptly trying to set fire to a copy of the Quran on the streets of London, while simultaneously using some remarkably fruity language about Islamic doctrine and its effect on believers. The man was Turkish dissident Hamit Coşkun: much to the disgust of a passing Muslim, he was burning the book outside the Turkish consulate as a demonstration against the excessive Islamification of Turkey under Recep Erdoğan. But whatever your distaste, you should be very worried about the fact that this man has now been branded a criminal – indeed, a hate criminal. Yesterday a district judge at Westminster Magistrates' Court had no compunction at convicting him of a religiously aggravated public order offence of engaging in disorderly conduct likely to cause distress. The judgment (available here)
