Burning of Koran ‘posed a threat to public order', prosecutors say
Hamit Coskun, 50, allegedly shouted 'f*** Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'Koran is burning' as he held the flaming Islamic text aloft in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, on February 13.
Coskun denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', motivated by 'hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam', contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Public Order Act 1986.
He also pleaded not guilty to an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', contrary to section five of the Public Order Act 1986.
At his trial at Westminster Magistrates' Court on Wednesday, prosecutor Philip McGhee said: 'He was in a public place, there were other people around within sight and hearing of him.
'He had evidently chosen the time and location deliberately as he would later admit to in interview under caution.'
He added: '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.'
Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, travelled from his home in the Midlands on February 13 and set fire to the Koran at around 2pm, the court heard.
Coskun had posted on social media that he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan who the defendant allegedly said 'has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a sharia regime', prosecutors said.
Coskun, who is an atheist, believes that he protested peacefully and burning the Koran amounted to freedom of expression, the court heard.
Ahead of his trial, in a quote released through the Free Speech Union, he said: 'Encountering such treatment in a country like England, which I truly believed to be a place where freedom prevailed, was a real shock to me.'
His legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society (NSS).
The Free Speech Union said it is defending him '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'.
It said Coskun is an asylum seeker who fled Turkey, having been a political prisoner for almost a decade, who 'thought he was coming to a democratic country where he would be free to peacefully protest about a particular religion'.
Lord Young of Acton, general secretary of the organisation, added: 'The rights to peaceful protest and freedom of expression are sacrosanct and should not be disregarded because of fears about inflaming community tensions in a multicultural society.'
Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS said: '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 case also highlights the alarming use of public order laws to curtail our collective right to protest and free speech based on the subjective reactions of others.
'Establishing a right not to be offended threatens the very foundation of free expression.'
A spokesperson for Humanists UK said that a successful prosecution would 'effectively resurrect the crime of blasphemy in England and Wales – 17 years after its abolition'.
They added: 'This reintroduction of blasphemy by the back door would have profound consequences, not only for free expression in the UK but for the safety and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of so-called 'apostates' in the UK and their right to freedom of thought and conscience.'
The trial, which is due to last one-day, continues.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Judge set to pass verdict after trial of man who burned Koran
A judge is set to pass verdict after the trial of a man who burned a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London. Hamit Coskun, 50, shouted 'f*** Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'Koran is burning' as he held the flaming Islamic text aloft in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, London, on February 13, Westminster Magistrates' Court heard last week. Coskun denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', motivated by 'hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam', contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Public Order Act 1986. He also pleaded not guilty to an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', contrary to section five of the Public Order Act 1986. The charges are alternative to each other, meaning if hostility towards religion is not proven, Coskun could still be found guilty of the simple offence of disorderly behaviour. His lawyer, Katy Thorne KC, argued last week that the prosecution is effectively trying to revive blasphemy laws, which were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and Scotland in 2021. Blasphemy remains an offence in Northern Ireland but is rarely enforced. Prosecutor Philip McGhee said the case is about disorderly conduct, not the act of burning the Koran itself, adding that the prosecution of Coskun does not represent a restriction on criticising religion. Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, travelled from his home in the Midlands and set fire to the Koran at around 2pm, the court heard. In footage captured on a mobile phone by a passerby that was shown to the court, a man approached and asked Coskun why he was burning a copy of the Koran. Coskun can be heard making a reference to 'terrorist' and the man called the defendant 'a f****** idiot'. The man approached him allegedly holding a knife or bladed article and appeared to slash out at him, the court heard. The footage appeared to show Coskun back away and use the burning Koran to deflect the attacker, who is alleged to have slashed out at him again. The man chased Coskun, and the defendant stumbled forward and fell to the ground, dropping the Koran, the footage showed. Coskun was spat at and kicked by the man, the court heard. The man said: 'Burning the Koran? It's my religion, you don't burn the Koran.' Coskun had posted on social media that he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who the defendant allegedly said 'has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a Sharia regime', prosecutors said. The defendant, who is an atheist, believes that he protested peacefully and burning the Koran amounted to freedom of expression, the court heard. His legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society (NSS). District Judge John McGarva will pass verdict at the same court on Monday. Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS, said before the trial: '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 case also highlights the alarming use of public order laws to curtail our collective right to protest and free speech based on the subjective reactions of others. 'Establishing a right not to be offended threatens the very foundation of free expression.' A spokesperson for Humanists UK previously said that a successful prosecution would 'effectively resurrect the crime of blasphemy in England and Wales – 17 years after its abolition'. They added: 'This reintroduction of blasphemy by the back door would have profound consequences, not only for free expression in the UK but for the safety and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of so-called 'apostates' in the UK and their right to freedom of thought and conscience.'
The Independent
2 hours ago
- The Independent
Mecca: Saudi Arabia launches Hajj permit crackdown in bid to stop heat deaths
Saudi Arabian authorities have stopped over 269,000 individuals without the necessary permits from entering Mecca ahead of the annual Hajj pilgrimage, officials announced on Sunday. The Saudi government attributes overcrowding during the Hajj to unauthorized participants, also noting that many of those who died in last year's extreme summer heat were those without official permission. These expulsions highlight the extent of unauthorized pilgrimages, as well as the strong desire to participate in the Hajj. Currently, there are 1.4 million Muslims officially in Mecca, with further arrivals expected in the coming days. There are fines of up to $5,000 and other punitive measures, like deportation, for anyone performing the Hajj without a permit. The policy includes citizens and those with Saudi residency. At a press conference in Mecca, officials said they had stopped 269,678 people without permits from entering the city. According to the rules, only those with permits are allowed to perform the pilgrimage, even if they live in the city year-round. Officials have also imposed penalties on more than 23,000 Saudi residents for violating Hajj regulations and revoked the licenses of 400 Hajj companies. Lieutenant General Mohammed Al-Omari told the media: 'The pilgrim is in our sight, and anyone who disobeys is in our hands.' The Hajj is the annual Islamic pilgrimage to Mecca and involves a series of religious rituals. It's a once-in-a-lifetime obligation for every Muslim who can afford it and is physically able to do it. But it has been marred in recent years by concerns about extreme temperatures, with pilgrims performing their rituals outdoors in peak daylight hours. Historically, deaths are not uncommon at the Hajj, which has seen at times over 2 million people travel to Saudi Arabia for a five-day pilgrimage. It has also seen fatal stampedes and other accidents. Saudi Arabia 's Civil Defense said Sunday that drones were being used for the first time at the Hajj. These can be used for surveillance and monitoring, as well as extinguishing fires.
North Wales Chronicle
4 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Judge set to pass verdict after trial of man who burned Koran
Hamit Coskun, 50, shouted 'f*** Islam', 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'Koran is burning' as he held the flaming Islamic text aloft in Rutland Gardens, Knightsbridge, London, on February 13, Westminster Magistrates' Court heard last week. Coskun denies a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', motivated by 'hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam', contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Public Order Act 1986. He also pleaded not guilty to an alternative charge of using disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress', contrary to section five of the Public Order Act 1986. The charges are alternative to each other, meaning if hostility towards religion is not proven, Coskun could still be found guilty of the simple offence of disorderly behaviour. His lawyer, Katy Thorne KC, argued last week that the prosecution is effectively trying to revive blasphemy laws, which were abolished in England and Wales in 2008 and Scotland in 2021. Blasphemy remains an offence in Northern Ireland but is rarely enforced. Prosecutor Philip McGhee said the case is about disorderly conduct, not the act of burning the Koran itself, adding that the prosecution of Coskun does not represent a restriction on criticising religion. Turkey-born Coskun, who is half Kurdish and half Armenian, travelled from his home in the Midlands and set fire to the Koran at around 2pm, the court heard. In footage captured on a mobile phone by a passerby that was shown to the court, a man approached and asked Coskun why he was burning a copy of the Koran. Coskun can be heard making a reference to 'terrorist' and the man called the defendant 'a f****** idiot'. The man approached him allegedly holding a knife or bladed article and appeared to slash out at him, the court heard. The footage appeared to show Coskun back away and use the burning Koran to deflect the attacker, who is alleged to have slashed out at him again. The man chased Coskun, and the defendant stumbled forward and fell to the ground, dropping the Koran, the footage showed. Coskun was spat at and kicked by the man, the court heard. The man said: 'Burning the Koran? It's my religion, you don't burn the Koran.' Coskun had posted on social media that he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan who the defendant allegedly said 'has made Turkey a base for radical Islamists and is trying to establish a Sharia regime', prosecutors said. The defendant, who is an atheist, believes that he protested peacefully and burning the Koran amounted to freedom of expression, the court heard. His legal fees are being paid for by the Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society (NSS). District Judge John McGarva will pass verdict at the same court on Monday. Stephen Evans, chief executive of the NSS, said before the trial: '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 case also highlights the alarming use of public order laws to curtail our collective right to protest and free speech based on the subjective reactions of others. 'Establishing a right not to be offended threatens the very foundation of free expression.' A spokesperson for Humanists UK previously said that a successful prosecution would 'effectively resurrect the crime of blasphemy in England and Wales – 17 years after its abolition'. They added: 'This reintroduction of blasphemy by the back door would have profound consequences, not only for free expression in the UK but for the safety and wellbeing of hundreds of thousands of so-called 'apostates' in the UK and their right to freedom of thought and conscience.'
