Convicting man over Koran burning would reintroduce blasphemy law, court told

Sky News

4 days ago

Convicting a man for burning the Koran would be 'tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law', his defence team has told a court.
Hamit Coskun appeared at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday after he allegedly shouted abusive slogans about Islam while burning the holy book outside the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge, London, on 13 February.
The 50-year-old denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour and an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour "within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress".
Katy Thorne, defending, said at his trial that the prosecution pursuing the case against Coskun was "seeking to introduce a law unknown to this land, namely blasphemy in relation to Islam".
Blasphemy laws were abolished in England and Wales in 2008, with Scotland following suit in 2021.
Ms Thorne told the court that burning the Koran "cannot be a criminal offence".
"To render such an act a criminal offence is tantamount to reintroducing a blasphemy law in relation to Islam, rendering the Koran a specially protected object in the UK, where a flag or another book would not be, and rendering trenchant or offensive criticism of Islam a criminal offence, is also akin to reinstating an offence of blasphemy," she said in her written argument.
"People must be free to exercise their religious or non-religious beliefs and to manifest those beliefs in whatever non-violent way they choose, and any curtailing by the state of that freedom must be absolutely necessary in a democratic society."
She said Coskun "did not exhort hate" to those following Islam, but protested "outside the Turkish Consulate, a political institution, which provided further evidence he was not seeking to persuade others to dislike Islam, but express his personal criticism of Turkey and its stance on Islam".
Ms Thorne added: "His protest was specifically political and thus... requires the highest protection of freedom of speech."
'Threat to public order'
However, prosecutor Philip McGhee said Coskun was not charged simply for burning the Koran, but for "disorderly conduct". He said prosecuting Coskun did not impact the ability of others to criticise religion.
Mr McGhee said Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, had deliberately chosen the time and location of his protest, travelling from his home in the Midlands to the consulate to set alight the Koran at around 2pm.
"His actions gave rise to a very clear threat to public order and went beyond a legitimate expression of protest, crossing the line to pose a threat to public order," Mr McGhee said.
Coskun, an atheist, had said on social media he was demonstrating against the "Islamist government" of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who he said had "made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime", prosecutors said.
The defendant's legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union (FSU) and the National Secular Society (NSS).
The FSU said it was defending Coskun "not because we're anti-Islam, but because we believe no one should be compelled to observe the blasphemy codes of any religion, whether Christian or Muslim".
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS, added: "A successful prosecution in this case could represent the effective criminalisation of damaging a Koran in public, edging us dangerously close to a prohibition on blasphemy."
The trial, which is expected to last a day, continues.