Latest news with #KatyThorne
The Independent
3 hours ago
- General
- 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.'
Telegraph
4 days ago
- General
- Telegraph
Man on trial for burning Koran ‘had right to criticise Islam'
In closing submissions on Thursday, Katy Thorne KC, for the defence, said: 'If this country wanted to criminalise the burning of books in public, or burning of religious books in public that would have been done. 'It has been discussed and it has not been criminalised.' Mr Coskun is accused of carrying out disorderly behaviour 'within the hearing or sight of a person likely to have caused harassment, alarm or distress' by burning a copy of the Koran. It is further alleged he held it aloft while shouting 'f--- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism', and was motivated by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam. Ms Thorne said his right to criticise religion was 'sacrosanct' and had to be protected. 'We suggest there have been, across history and indeed now, many people who are hostile to other religions. 'Feminists to Catholicism as an example. But that is a sacrosanct act they are entitled to express and however offensive Muslims may find the behaviour and beliefs of the defendant he is entitled to have them.' Hostility to religion, not its followers She said his actions were not motivated by a hostility towards the followers of Islam but to the religion itself. She added: 'He is protesting against the religion of Islam and his governments' relationship with Islam and Islamic terrorism. 'He was motivated by that hostility to Islam and its teaching because of what has happened in his country and what has happened to his family by extremists purporting to act for that religion. 'He was complaining about the move away from secularism, which he holds very dear. 'He was complaining more generally about the teachings of Islam but the reason why he was there in that place were his complaints about Turkey.' Philip McGhee, for the CPS, said that Mr Coskun was not being prosecuted for the burning of the book. He said the combination of the derogatory remarks about Islam, and the fact it was done in public, made it a public order offence. 'Aware his behaviour may be disorderly' 'He was aware at the very least that his behaviour may be disorderly', he said. Mr McGhee added: 'He was motivated at least partly by hostility to followers of Islam by their membership of that group'. At the end of the hour-long hearing, District Judge John McGarva, refused an application by the CPS to prevent the publication of a video showing the burning of the Koran and the subsequent attack on Mr Coskun. The prosecutors had argued it could prejudice the upcoming trial of the man who attacked Mr Coskun if it was released. The video shows Mr Coskun burning the book outside the consulate in Knightsbridge shouting 'Islam is religion of terrorism'. As he did so, a man from a neighbouring building is seen coming out to ask him why he was doing it. 'Terrorist,' replied Mr Coskun. The man then goes back inside, before coming out and attacking Mr Coskun. He appears to slash at Mr Coskun with a blade and then begins kicking him when he falls to the ground. Although he has admitted assaulting Mr Coskun he has denied using a knife in the attack. The man, whose identity is still subject to reporting restrictions, will go on trial in 2027. Judge McGarva however ruled that the footage should be made available to the press. 'Attack on the freedom of the press' A spokesman for the Free Speech Union, who are supporting Mr Coskun, said the CPS attempt to prohibit the fact Mr Coskun's attacker had a knife was a 'direct attack on the freedom of the press'. He said: 'Not only is the Crown Prosecution Service trying to punish Hamit for exercising his right to freedom of expression, but it also sought to ban the press from reporting that Hamit's attacker tried to slash him with a knife – a direct attack on the freedom of the press. The judge wisely threw out this application. 'The truth is that Hamit was the victim of a series of violent attacks. Rather than punish his attackers – only one of the four people who attacked Hamit is being prosecuted – the CPS is attempting to punish him. Now that the judge has lifted the reporting restrictions, the truth is impossible to conceal – this is a clear case of victim blaming.' Judge McGarva said he would give his verdict on Mr Coskun's case on Monday at the same court. Addressing the defendant directly, he said: 'I know he is anxious but I have got to get this right. There is quite a lot to think about.'
Sky News
5 days ago
- General
- Sky News
Convicting man over Koran burning would reintroduce blasphemy law, court told
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.
