logo
#

Latest news with #FreeSpeech

Bringing back blasphemy laws would only be bad for Muslims
Bringing back blasphemy laws would only be bad for Muslims

The Independent

time2 days ago

  • General
  • The Independent

Bringing back blasphemy laws would only be bad for Muslims

As a Muslim, I do not welcome the conviction of a man who set fire to a copy of the Quran. Hamit Coskun – a 50-year-old of Armenian and Kurdish descent who was born and raised in Turkey, and whose family have suffered persecution at the hands of Islamists – was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence. He was fined £240 after he held the flaming book aloft outside the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge while shouted 'Islam is religion of terrorism' and 'F*** Islam'. His one-man protest wound up when he was himself assaulted by a passer-by. Although I find the burning of the Quran a thoroughly grotesque act – on a par, say, with derogatory cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad – the reality is that England is a country where the medieval common-law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel have been scrapped. Following the verdict, Coskun asked: 'Would I have been prosecuted if I'd set fire to a copy of the Bible outside Westminster Abbey? I doubt it.' Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said that the decision was wrong, as it put free speech is under threat: 'It revives a blasphemy law that parliament repealed. I have no confidence in 'Two-Tier Keir' to defend the rights of the public to criticise all religions.' The judge made clear that it was not the burning of the holy text of Islam that warranted prosecution, but other factors. The CPS had argued that Coskun's actions had been 'a real threat to public order', while the defendant was said to have made Islamophobic comments during police interviews. There is a growing Muslim population in Britain who hold their faith very dearly – myself included – but for others, they are anxious over the presence of Islam in modern Britain and the impact of orthodox religious doctrines on wider society. The ruling to find Coskun guilty of a racially aggravated public order offence will reinforce the public perception that Islam is provided with preferential treatment under Britain's model of multicultural governance – which, in turn, will only serve to harden anti-Muslim hostility and prejudices. Contrary to this ruling being in the interests of so-called 'diversity management', it runs the risk of further undermining social cohesion. There is also the possibility that it will encourage an uptick in Quran burnings – which is an act which rarely takes place on British soil. In Scandinavia, the tension between freedom of speech and desecration of holy texts has recently been laid bare. In Sweden – a country which had some of the strongest protections for freedom of expression in the world and abolished its blasphemy laws back in the 1970s – people have been charged over the burning of the Quran. This included Salman Momika, an anti-Islam Iraqi refugee who was shot dead in January – a killing that was welcomed by al-Qaeda. Meanwhile, Denmark has passed a law to stop Quran burnings, banning the 'inappropriate treatment' of religious texts, with offenders now potentially facing imprisonment. This was quite the U-turn after the parliament, only a few years earlier, repealed a 334-year-old blasphemy law. In the UK, there is now growing pressure to re-introduce similar laws, with the Labour MP for Birmingham Hall Green and Moseley, Tahir Ali, last year calling on Keir Starmer to prohibit the desecration of all religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions. While the prime minister did not pledge support for Ali's proposal, neither did he rule it out. Blasphemy laws in England and Wales were abolished by a Labour government in 2008. But sometimes, it is the perception that a particular right is under threat that results in the greater exercising of it. This ruling is likely to heighten anti-religion rebelliousness, not reduce it – which is not an ideal outcome, most of all for religious social conservatives. The reality is that England is a country with an established church, which provides its faith minorities with considerable religious freedoms. British Muslims benefit from a wide array of opportunities, rights and protections which are not enjoyed by their co-religionists in other European countries such as France, where the Fifth Republic's militant secular universalism is undeniably oppressive towards its Muslim communities. The Supreme Governor of the Church of England, King Charles III, is arguably the most pro-Islam figurehead in the western world. His Majesty has previously championed Muslim contributions to the European Renaissance, extolled the virtues of Islamic finance, and championed Islam's emphasis on environmental sustainability. But none of this should be taken for granted – the pendulum should not swing so far, that the freedom to dissent and rally against organised religion in our liberal democracy is undermined by the courts. The very real fact is that religious freedom is protected by the right to blaspheme; far from being contradictory, they are mutually reinforcing. Adherents of Islam in England have the freedom to proselytise and work towards spreading their faith, known as da'wah. This can involve criticising other faiths and challenging their core tenets – such as the doctrines of the Trinity and Incarnation in Christianity, or idolatry in polytheistic religions such as Hinduism. Devout members of non-Muslim faith groups may find this to be gravely insulting to their faiths – indeed, blasphemous. But that is part of the social contract: with religious freedom comes the responsibility of accepting that others will behave towards one's religion in a way they may not like, to the point it may be considered grossly offensive. It is time for religious social conservatives – especially in Muslim communities – to recognise that freedom of expression is a friend, not an enemy, of Islam in modern Britain. That would be a major breakthrough for community relations in our multi-faith society.

Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case
Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case

Yahoo

time28-05-2025

  • General
  • Yahoo

Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case

Hamit Coskun is quite possibly Britain's most endangered man. Certainly he appears to have a death wish. In February, he took a coach to London, walked up to the Turkish consulate, pulled from his bag a Koran, and set fire to it with a lighter. A video of the incident went viral after Mr Coskun, aged 50, was violently attacked for what he insisted was a meaningful protest and what many other people would view as an anti-Islamic stunt. In the aftermath of the Koran burning, he says two Iraqi men broke into his home in Derby and threatened him with a knife and an ashtray. Police took him from his home and moved him to a safe house elsewhere in the Midlands, a nondescript terrace that I won't describe further for obvious reasons. On Wednesday, he goes on trial at Westminster magistrates' court charged with disorderly behaviour likely to cause 'harassment, alarm or distress' for setting the Koran alight. As he did so, according to the charges, Mr Coskun swore, and then shouted 'Islam is religion of terrorism' in his broken English. He is accused under the Public Order Act of being motivated 'by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Mr Coskun remains unrepentant. He will plead not guilty and intends to go on a tour of the UK burning Korans in other cities, whether he wins or loses his case. He himself has become a cause célèbre. The Free Speech Union has taken up his case and paid for a security team as well as half his legal fees – the National Secular Society is paying for the other half. Meanwhile, an American woman who read about his arrest online plans to fly to the UK and join Mr Coskun in future Koran-burning protests. Mr Coskun's lawyers will argue that he has a human right to peaceful protest, under Article 10 of the Convention on Human Rights, to burn a Koran if he wants to. They have found an unlikely ally: Sir Keir Starmer. Almost a quarter of a century ago, Sir Keir, in his day job as a human rights barrister, successfully argued that a peace activist had the legal right to deface the Stars and Stripes flag in a protest outside a US airbase in Norfolk. In 2001, Sir Keir told the High Court: 'Flag denigration is a form of protest activity renowned the world over.' He added that the court should protect the right of his client – a 59-year-old peacenik – to stage a 'peaceful protest in a free and democratic society'. The High Court agreed with Sir Keir and quashed his client's conviction for disorderly behaviour 'likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress' – the same part of the Public Order Act under which Mr Coskun is charged. His client, Lindis Percy, would later suggest that Sir Keir had told her he had worn underpants emblazoned with the Stars and Stripes so he could show his unwavering support for her whenever he sat down wearing them. Sitting in his safe house, Mr Coskun, a father-of-three, in some ways makes for an unlikely heroic figure. He is diminutive – just 5ft 5in tall – and courageous to the point of madness. He speaks no English, talking through an interpreter via Zoom. It takes him 10 minutes to answer the question: 'How old are you?' because of a mix up over his papers at birth. He says he is officially 50 although he looks older. Mr Coskun came to the UK from Turkey two and half years ago to flee persecution. He is seeking asylum and his case is under review. He is half Armenian and half Kurdish and a committed atheist, who spent close to a decade in jail for membership of a Kurdish political party that Turkish authorities said – and which Mr Coskun denies – was a terrorist front. He was a political activist who was 'abused and tortured' in detention; on one occasion a gun was put to his neck. He had become alarmed at what he sees as the Islamification of Turkey, constitutionally a modern secular state but where, he says, recent times have seen Islamism gain a hold, stoked by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, its authoritarian president, to maintain his grip on power. It explains his decision to make the trip down to London on Feb 13. The week before, he had posted on social media his concern that the Koran was catapulting Turkey to sharia law. 'I have been studying the Koran for 25 years now,' he says, convinced it encourages terrorism. 'So on February 13 I went to London, I took the bus. At 2pm in front of the Turkish consulate. That's because Turkey has been made a base for extremism and that is why I burned the Koran,' Mr Coskun says. He packed the Koran, two lighters (so he had a spare) and then set it alight outside the consulate. All hell broke loose. A video posted on social media shows him shouting while holding the holy book by now in flames. A man comes out of a neighbouring building and asks him why he is doing it. 'Terrorist,' replies Mr Coskun. The man responds: 'You're a f---ing idot', adding: 'I'm going to f---ing kill you now.' He then disappears back inside, comes out and begins attacking Mr Coskun who is punched and pushed to the ground and then kicked – all while still clutching the Koran which continues to burn. A delivery cyclist also appears to run over Mr Coskun's hand as he lies on the ground. His attacker would subsequently plead guilty to assault. 'I don't speak English but I could tell the guy was threatening me. After a minute he came back. I was scared. But that doesn't mean I am a coward,' Mr Coskun says now. 'Then the delivery rider stamped on my hand and threw his bicycle on me before cycling off.' Mr Coskun was first taken to hospital for treatment. He was then arrested and held for 24 hours in the cells, before being summoned to court and released on bail back to his home in Derby. He woke up in the night to find two men – he says they were Iraqis – in his kitchen. 'One had a knife and one had an ashtray. They pushed me against the wall and they had the video of the Koran burning incident on their phone and they told me: 'If you keep doing this you will die'.' They called him an unbeliever and an infidel. Mr Coskun wisely got out of town – he says the incident in his Derby flat was 'far scarier' than the assault on him in London – and removed to the safe house that is now home. There is nothing on the walls. It is bare, bleak and miserable, with curtains covering the windows. But he remains steadfast in his mini-crusade. Win or lose Wednesday's trial, he says: 'Absolutely I will carry on burning Korans. I am an activist. I was really surprised I got charged because I really believe this country was a liberal democracy where freedom of expression existed and I was really shocked by the attitude towards me. 'Absolutely I plead not guilty. I never accept this to be a crime.' Mr Coskun insists 'I don't want to upset anyone' although it's hard to see how he squares that with burning the Koran in public. Burning any holy book must inevitably cause offence but he replies: 'There is nothing wrong in questioning a religion.' He expresses his support for Tommy Robinson, the far-Right, anti-Islam militant just released from jail for contempt of court. 'I love him,' he says. Mr Coskun denies he is a martyr, although he describes his campaign against the Koran as 'his fight'. It is, he insists, his 'democratic right' to burn the Koran if he wants to. He faces a fine if found guilty in the magistrates' court and when he walks free – convicted or otherwise – plans a Koran-burning tour of Liverpool, Birmingham and Glasgow. 'I am ready to pay the cost,' he says. 'It's OK. It's not a problem. I know what could happen to me. They are after me.' Mr Coskun shows me a message sent to him via his social media account that says: 'I will cut your throat… Just wait, you b----d.' The case in the magistrates' court will be keenly watched. It threatens to be a landmark, potentially setting some kind of precedent. Mr Coskun's lawyers will draw on Sir Keir's successful defence of Ms Percy in 2001. Lord Young of Acton, the Tory peer and general secretary of the Free Speech Union, said ahead of the case: 'In 2001, Sir Keir Starmer successfully appealed the conviction of Lindis Percy for desecrating the American flag. 'He persuaded the High Court that the denigration of an object of veneration should not be a criminal offence, and the right to peaceful protest in a free and democratic society should not be overridden by bogus arguments about the need to preserve community cohesion in a multicultural society. 'If Sir Keir was still a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, the Free Speech Union might well have hired him to defend Hamit Coskun. But I fear he has changed his mind about this issue since becoming Prime Minister, particularly when the object of veneration is a copy of the Koran.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case
Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case

Telegraph

time28-05-2025

  • General
  • Telegraph

Starmer dragged into Koran-burning court case

Hamit Coskun is quite possibly Britain's most endangered man. Certainly he appears to have a death wish. In February, he took a coach to London, walked up to the Turkish consulate, pulled from his bag a Koran, and set fire to it with a lighter. A video of the incident went viral after Mr Coskun, aged 50, was violently attacked for what he insisted was a meaningful protest and what many other people would view as an anti-Islamic stunt. In the aftermath of the Koran burning, he says two Iraqi men broke into his home in Derby and threatened him with a knife and an ashtray. Police took him from his home and moved him to a safe house elsewhere in the Midlands, a nondescript terrace that I won't describe further for obvious reasons. On Wednesday, he goes on trial at Westminster magistrates' court charged with disorderly behaviour likely to cause 'harassment, alarm or distress' for setting the Koran alight. As he did so, according to the charges, Mr Coskun swore, and then shouted 'Islam is religion of terrorism' in his broken English. He is accused under the Public Order Act of being motivated 'by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Mr Coskun remains unrepentant. He will plead not guilty and intends to go on a tour of the UK burning Korans in other cities, whether he wins or loses his case. He himself has become a cause célèbre. The Free Speech Union has taken up his case and paid for a security team as well as half his legal fees – the National Secular Society is paying for the other half. Meanwhile, an American woman who read about his arrest online plans to fly to the UK and join Mr Coskun in future Koran-burning protests. Mr Coskun's lawyers will argue that he has a human right to peaceful protest, under Article 10 of the Convention on Human Rights, to burn a Koran if he wants to. They have found an unlikely ally: Sir Keir Starmer. Almost a quarter of a century ago, Sir Keir, in his day job as a human rights barrister, successfully argued that a peace activist had the legal right to deface the Stars and Stripes flag in a protest outside a US airbase in Norfolk. In 2001, Sir Keir told the High Court: 'Flag denigration is a form of protest activity renowned the world over.' He added that the court should protect the right of his client – a 59-year-old peacenik – to stage a 'peaceful protest in a free and democratic society'. The High Court agreed with Sir Keir and quashed his client's conviction for disorderly behaviour 'likely to cause harassment, alarm and distress' – the same part of the Public Order Act under which Mr Coskun is charged. His client, Lindis Percy, would later suggest that Sir Keir had told her he had worn underpants emblazoned with the Stars and Stripes so he could show his unwavering support for her whenever he sat down wearing them. Sitting in his safe house, Mr Coskun, a father-of-three, in some ways makes for an unlikely heroic figure. He is diminutive – just 5ft 5in tall – and courageous to the point of madness. He speaks no English, talking through an interpreter via Zoom. It takes him 10 minutes to answer the question: 'How old are you?' because of a mix up over his papers at birth. He says he is officially 50 although he looks older. Mr Coskun came to the UK from Turkey two and half years ago to flee persecution. He is seeking asylum and his case is under review. He is half Armenian and half Kurdish and a committed atheist, who spent close to a decade in jail for membership of a Kurdish political party that Turkish authorities said – and which Mr Coskun denies – was a terrorist front. He was a political activist who was 'abused and tortured' in detention; on one occasion a gun was put to his neck. He had become alarmed at what he sees as the Islamification of Turkey, constitutionally a modern secular state but where, he says, recent times have seen Islamism gain a hold, stoked by Recep Tayyip Erdogan, its authoritarian president, to maintain his grip on power. It explains his decision to make the trip down to London on Feb 13. The week before, he had posted on social media his concern that the Koran was catapulting Turkey to sharia law. 'I have been studying the Koran for 25 years now,' he says, convinced it encourages terrorism. 'So on February 13 I went to London, I took the bus. At 2pm in front of the Turkish consulate. That's because Turkey has been made a base for extremism and that is why I burned the Koran,' Mr Coskun says. He packed the Koran, two lighters (so he had a spare) and then set it alight outside the consulate. All hell broke loose. 'I'm going to f---ing kill you now' A video posted on social media shows him shouting while holding the holy book by now in flames. A man comes out of a neighbouring building and asks him why he is doing it. 'Terrorist,' replies Mr Coskun. The man responds: 'You're a f---ing idot', adding: 'I'm going to f---ing kill you now.' He then disappears back inside, comes out and begins attacking Mr Coskun who is punched and pushed to the ground and then kicked – all while still clutching the Koran which continues to burn. A delivery cyclist also appears to run over Mr Coskun's hand as he lies on the ground. His attacker would subsequently plead guilty to assault. 'I don't speak English but I could tell the guy was threatening me. After a minute he came back. I was scared. But that doesn't mean I am a coward,' Mr Coskun says now. 'Then the delivery rider stamped on my hand and threw his bicycle on me before cycling off.' Mr Coskun was first taken to hospital for treatment. He was then arrested and held for 24 hours in the cells, before being summoned to court and released on bail back to his home in Derby. He woke up in the night to find two men – he says they were Iraqis – in his kitchen. 'One had a knife and one had an ashtray. They pushed me against the wall and they had the video of the Koran burning incident on their phone and they told me: 'If you keep doing this you will die'.' They called him an unbeliever and an infidel. Mr Coskun wisely got out of town – he says the incident in his Derby flat was 'far scarier' than the assault on him in London – and removed to the safe house that is now home. There is nothing on the walls. It is bare, bleak and miserable, with curtains covering the windows. But he remains steadfast in his mini-crusade. Win or lose Wednesday's trial, he says: 'Absolutely I will carry on burning Korans. I am an activist. I was really surprised I got charged because I really believe this country was a liberal democracy where freedom of expression existed and I was really shocked by the attitude towards me. 'Absolutely I plead not guilty. I never accept this to be a crime.' Mr Coskun insists 'I don't want to upset anyone' although it's hard to see how he squares that with burning the Koran in public. Burning any holy book must inevitably cause offence but he replies: 'There is nothing wrong in questioning a religion.' He expresses his support for Tommy Robinson, the far-Right, anti-Islam militant just released from jail for contempt of court. 'I love him,' he says. Mr Coskun denies he is a martyr, although he describes his campaign against the Koran as 'his fight'. It is, he insists, his 'democratic right' to burn the Koran if he wants to. He faces a fine if found guilty in the magistrates' court and when he walks free – convicted or otherwise – plans a Koran-burning tour of Liverpool, Birmingham and Glasgow. 'I am ready to pay the cost,' he says. 'It's OK. It's not a problem. I know what could happen to me. They are after me.' Mr Coskun shows me a message sent to him via his social media account that says: 'I will cut your throat… Just wait, you b----d.' The case in the magistrates' court will be keenly watched. It threatens to be a landmark, potentially setting some kind of precedent. Mr Coskun's lawyers will draw on Sir Keir's successful defence of Ms Percy in 2001. Lord Young of Acton, the Tory peer and general secretary of the Free Speech Union, said ahead of the case: 'In 2001, Sir Keir Starmer successfully appealed the conviction of Lindis Percy for desecrating the American flag. 'He persuaded the High Court that the denigration of an object of veneration should not be a criminal offence, and the right to peaceful protest in a free and democratic society should not be overridden by bogus arguments about the need to preserve community cohesion in a multicultural society. 'If Sir Keir was still a barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, the Free Speech Union might well have hired him to defend Hamit Coskun. But I fear he has changed his mind about this issue since becoming Prime Minister, particularly when the object of veneration is a copy of the Koran.'

Why are Kneecap facing consequences when Israel is not?
Why are Kneecap facing consequences when Israel is not?

Irish Times

time26-05-2025

  • Politics
  • Irish Times

Why are Kneecap facing consequences when Israel is not?

What happens next in Gaza – and members of the Israeli government are laying out their plans in full view, clearly encouraged by the lack of consequences for war crimes to date – will continue to define the trajectory of our world. It already has. The longer Israel's destruction of Gaza and the Palestinian people continues, and the longer those with the power to stop it do nothing effective, the more heightened actions of protest will become and the more trust in those obliged to stop this destruction will collapse. This trajectory seems inevitable. It is the hypocrisy that drives people stone mad. Identifying the hypocrisies and gaslighting inherent in the response to Israel's actions in Gaza is not necessarily whataboutery, but it is a signal of the kind of double standards that warp truth and clarity. READ MORE Some of these examples may feel like small beans when held up against the mass slaughter in Gaza. If Russia was booted out of the Eurovision Song Contest , then why wasn't Israel? As it happens, the European Broadcasting Union is now reviewing the event's voting system due to the curiously high level of public voting for Israel's song in the competition. In the United States , for another example, the same voices who were cheerleaders for 'free speech' on university campuses when it came to right-wing provocateurs now advocate for the suppression of protest when it comes to Palestinian solidarity. What this demonstrates is that 'free speech' was clearly never a value, but an empty phrase that is an example of the ultimate hypocrisy as it is leveraged for the opposite of its meaning. Some hypocrisies are about who is reprimanded by the law and who isn't. If a member of the Belfast hip hop group Kneecap can be charged with committing a terrorist offence for allegedly displaying a flag the group says was thrown on stage during a concert, then will something also happen about allegations of much more serious crimes also happening in Israel's war on Palestine ? Last month, British human rights lawyers filed a 240-page war crimes complaint with the Metropolitan Police's war crimes unit. It concerned 10 British citizens serving in the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). The Guardian reported that the dossier included allegations about 10 suspects targeting and killing citizens by sniper fire, indiscriminately attacking civilian areas and hospitals, attacking historic and religious sites, and the forced transfer and displacement of civilians. 'Scores of legal and human rights experts have signed a letter of support urging the war crimes team to investigate the complaints,' the Guardian report stated. Why Kneecap with a flag, and not others with a gun? Of course, it's not a binary choice. The application of the law is not one of finite gestures. No one is demanding the jettisoning of policing of less serious allegations of crimes in the pursuit of larger ones. Investigating those alleged to have committed 'core international crimes' is complex and would take time. But why Kneecap, and why now? Is it anything to do with the manufactured uproar around their Coachella performance? And what happens when larger crimes – war crimes – are not met with any consequences at all? The arm of the law delivers a message, both in its action and stasis. The public subsumes that message. As people identify hypocrisies, and perceive distorted priorities, their cynicism grows and their trust in institutions erodes. Kneecap said in a statement: 'The IDF units they [the British state] arm and fly spy plane missions for are the real terrorists, the whole world can see it.' Whatever you think about Kneecap – what they did or didn't do or say – they are raising legitimate questions of proportionality here. Part of the power of artists is their capacity to offer perspective in real time. The political sphere operates on a lag – this is why culture moves politics, and not the other way around. The lack of a concerted international effort to stop what Israel is doing in Gaza has frustrated those protesting and advocating for peace and freedom who are quietly screaming: catch up, do something. These metaphorical screams can become real actions that sometimes cross lines. The murder of two people working for the Israeli embassy in Washington DC last week was a horrific event that could not have been predicted. Yet it is not a surprise to see violence erupt. It is never justified, and it is wrong. But there is a degree to which there is a terrible inevitability about it. When protest is policed, but the legitimate reasons for the protests are not; when outspoken artists are charged and soldiers participating in what has been characterised by so many as genocide are not; when governments and global institutions speak of international law and values, but do not uphold them, then anger, frustration, despair, pessimism take hold. So, too, do feelings of helplessness, of a lack of agency, fear of reprisals for protest and ultimately a lack of trust in governments, media and global institutions. Poet June Jordan was right when she described what people were prepared to do for the Palestinian people as a litmus test for morality.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store