Latest news with #McGarva
Roya News
3 days ago
- General
- Roya News
Man convicted for Quran burning outside Turkish consulate in London
A 50-year-old man has been convicted of a religiously aggravated offence after burning a copy of the Quran in front of the Turkish consulate in London earlier this year. Hamit Coskun, who traveled from Derby to Knightsbridge, set fire to the Islamic holy book while making offensive remarks about Islam on February 13. The act, which took place outside the consulate on Rutland Gardens, was deemed both inflammatory and hostile by Westminster Magistrates Court. District Judge John McGarva found Coskun guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence as well as disorderly behaviour, handing down a 240 pound (USD 324) fine and imposing an additional statutory surcharge of 96 pounds (USD 130). In court, Judge McGarva criticized the nature of Coskun's actions, describing them as 'provocative and taunting,' and stated, 'You have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers.' The judge said Coskun's motivations were rooted in personal and familial experiences in Turkey, adding, 'It's not possible to separate your views about the religion from your views about the followers.' He further noted, 'Your actions in burning the Quran where you did were highly provocative, and your actions were accompanied by bad language… motivated at least in part by hatred of followers of the religion.' Coskun, who is of Kurdish and Armenian descent, had argued that his protest was aimed solely at the Turkish government, particularly President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom he accused of turning Turkey into a haven for "radical Islamists". Prosecutors cited social media posts where Coskun denounced Erdogan's government and voiced concern about alleged moves toward establishing a 'Sharia regime.' Following his conviction, Coskun issued a statement calling the ruling 'an assault on free speech' and warning that it could discourage others from exercising their rights to protest. His legal defense has received backing from both the National Secular Society and the Free Speech Union (FSU), who have vowed to challenge the verdict through every legal channel. An FSU spokesperson said the organization is prepared to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights if necessary, arguing, 'Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn't require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers.' The case has also drawn attention from political figures. Equalities Minister and Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch took to X, stating, 'De facto blasphemy laws will set this country on the road to ruin. Freedom of belief, and freedom not to believe, are inalienable rights in Britain.' While a spokesperson for the prime minister refrained from commenting on the specific case, they reaffirmed that 'there are no blasphemy laws and no plans to introduce any.' Judge McGarva emphasized in his ruling that the conviction was not an attempt to revive blasphemy laws, which were officially abolished in 2008. He acknowledged that burning a religious book is not inherently unlawful but said the combination of Islamophobic remarks and inflammatory conduct rendered Coskun's actions criminal in this instance. Humanists UK also weighed in, expressing concern about the legal threshold for such prosecutions. A spokesperson stated, 'We must make sure that public order legislation is not used to disproportionately target speech – even offensive speech – on religious matters, thereby chilling legitimate criticism and expression.'
Mint
3 days ago
- Politics
- Mint
Man convicted of burning Quran outside Turkish consulate in London, Conservative Party calls it ‘wrong' verdict
A man who burned a Koran (Quran) outside the Turkish consulate in London was on Monday found guilty by a district court on charges of a religiously aggravated public order offence. The accused, identified as 50-year-old Hamit Coskun, on February 13 shouted "Islam is religion of terrorism" and "Koran is burning" as he set the religious book on fire, reported news agency AFP. District Judge John McGarva at London's Westminster Magistrates' Court found Coskun guilty of using disorderly behaviour "within the hearing or sight of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress". Coskun was motivated by "hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam", said McGarva. The court has issued a fine of £240 ($325), with a statutory surcharge of £96, on Coskun. "Your actions in burning the Koran 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," said the judge, according to AFPreport. Turkish-born Coskun, who is currently seeking asylum in the United Kingdom, had denied the charge and posted on social media that he was protesting against the "Islamist government" of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. During the case hearing, state prosecutors insisted Coskun was not being prosecuted for burning the book. "He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public," said Philip McGhee, for the Crown Prosecution Service, according to the AFP report. The judge also said: "Burning a religious book, although offensive, to some is not necessarily disorderly," according to a Reuters report. "What made his conduct disorderly was the timing and location of the conduct and that all this was accompanied by abusive language. There was no need for him to use the 'F word' and direct it towards Islam," McGarva added. Coskun's legal fees were paid by the Free Speech Union (FSU) and the National Secular Society, which argued he was essentially being prosecuted for blasphemy, despite Britain's free-speech guarantees. In reaction to the court judgement, the main opposition Conservative Party said on X: "Britain has no blasphemy laws. Yet this verdict creates one de facto." "Parliament never voted for it. The British people do not want it. This decision is wrong," it added.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Man convicted after burning Koran in public
The Crown Prosecution Service has been accused of reviving blasphemy laws after a man who set fire to a copy of the Koran was convicted of a racially aggravated public order offence. Hamit Coskun shouted 'f--- Islam' and 'Islam is religion of terrorism' while holding the religious text above his head during a protest on Feb 13. The 50-year-old, who was violently attacked by a passerby during the demonstration in London, went on trial last week, accused of an offence under the Public Order Act. At Westminster magistrates' court on Monday, he was found guilty of a religiously aggravated public order offence of using disorderly conduct, which was motivated 'in part by hostility towards members of a religious group, namely followers of Islam'. Robert Jenrick, shadow justice secretary, said: 'This decision is wrong. It revives a blasphemy law that parliament repealed. 'Free speech is under threat. I have no confidence in Two-Tier Keir to defend the rights of the public to criticise all religions.' Blasphemy laws were abolished in the UK 17 years ago. The CPS said that Coskun was not being prosecuted for burning the book. They argued it was the combination of his derogatory remarks about Islam and the fact that it was done in public that made it an offence. The CPS originally charged Coskun, who is an atheist, with harassing the 'religious institution of Islam'. However, the charge was later amended after free speech campaigners took up his cause and argued he was essentially being accused of blasphemy. District Judge John McGarva said, 'there was a real problem with the original charge, which referred to Islam as if it was a person, when it is not'. He said, however, that the current prosecution was not 'an attempt to bring back and expand blasphemy law.' He said: 'A decision needs to be made as to whether your conduct was simply you exercising your right to protest and freedom of speech or whether your behaviour crossed a line into criminal conduct.' Katy Thorne KC, Coskun's barrister, had argued that even the amended charges against him effectively criminalised any public burning of a religious book and were tantamount to blasphemy laws. 'It is effectively chilling the right of citizens to criticise religion,' she said. She said Coskun's actions were not motivated by hostility towards the followers of Islam but to the religion itself. Judge McGarva, however, said he did not accept that argument. Addressing Coskun, he said: 'You believe Islam is an ideology which encourages its followers to violent paedophilia and a disregard for the rights of non-believers. 'You don't distinguish between the two. I find you have a deep-seated hatred of Islam and its followers. That is based on your experiences in Turkey and the experiences of your family.' Giving his verdict, Judge McGarva said: 'Your actions in burning the Koran 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.' The judge ordered Coskun, who is currently claiming asylum, to pay a fine of £240. The court heard Coskun, who is now in hiding, had to flee his home country of Turkey two and a half years ago to escape persecution. He argued he was protesting against the 'Islamist government' of Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Giving evidence, Coskun made a number of comments about Islam, including claiming the majority of paedophiles are Muslim. Lawyers for the CPS insisted that Coskun was not being prosecuted for setting fire to the Koran. Philip McGhee, for the CPS, said: 'He is being prosecuted for his disorderly behaviour in public.' He added: 'Nothing about the prosecution of this defendant for his words and actions has any impact on the ability of anyone to make any trenchant criticism of a religion. On Feb 13, Coskun, who is of Armenian-Kurdish descent, travelled from his home in the Midlands to the Turkish consulate in Knightsbridge. He then set fire to the holy book and held it above his head, shouting, 'Islam is religion of terrorism'and 'f--- Islam'. As he did so, a passerby attacked him and appeared to slash at Coskun with a blade and then began kicking him when he fell to the ground. Although the man has admitted assaulting Coskun, he has denied using a knife in the attack. The man, whose identity is subject to reporting restrictions, will go on trial in 2027. The National Secular Society (NSS), which, alongside the Free Speech Union, paid for Coskun's legal fees, said the verdict 'jeopardises' free expression. A spokesperson for the FSU said: 'This is deeply disappointing. Everyone should be able to exercise their rights to protest peacefully and to freedom of expression, regardless of how offensive or upsetting it may be to some people. 'The Free Speech Union and the National Secular Society intend to appeal this verdict and keep on appealing it until it's overturned. If that means taking it all the way to the European Court of Human Rights, we will do so.' 'Religious tolerance is an important British value, but it doesn't require non-believers to respect the blasphemy codes of believers. On the contrary, it requires people of faith to tolerate those who criticise and protest against their religion, just as their values and beliefs are tolerated.' 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.
Evening Standard
4 days ago
- Evening Standard
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.'
Yahoo
28-01-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Private school head accuses Reeves of ‘politically motivated tax on education'
A private school headteacher has accused Rachel Reeves of imposing a 'politically motivated education tax' on British students, after it emerged US military personnel would be exempt. Andrew McGarva, principal at Morrison's Academy in Perthshire, Scotland, said he was 'dismayed' to learn the children of American soldiers would be spared the tax after Labour's 'steadfast refusal to consider any form of exemption or delay for vulnerable groups'. It comes after The Telegraph revealed last week that the 20pc VAT levy on school fees would not apply to children of US soldiers because of a tax rule that has exempted American military from paying tax on services since 1951. In a briefing note, HM Revenue and Customs said American military families would be exempt under the 'VAT-free purchase scheme'. The tax relief dates back to the NATO Status of Forces Agreement signed 74 years ago. Mr McGarva, who has led the £20,880-a-year Scottish school for the past three years, said: 'This decision highlights inconsistencies in the imposition of VAT on school fees and raises troubling questions about our Government's priorities. 'It feels as though this decision has more to do with keeping in step with the US than protecting children's education. 'The introduction of this 'education tax' is not about improving the state sector or addressing inequalities – it is a politically motivated move that risks harming children, families and communities across the UK.' It comes after Labour stopped short of granting an exemption for British service families at the Budget in October. This was despite warnings it could spark an exodus of military families at a time when the Army is at its smallest size in 200 years. In an interview with The Scotsman, Mr McGarva added: 'What makes this policy particularly frustrating is the Government's steadfast refusal to consider any form of exemption or delay for vulnerable groups. 'Families of children with additional needs, schools serving niche communities, and those supporting the armed forces have all been dismissed. 'However an exemption has now been made for US personnel, supposedly in adherence to an agreement signed over 70 years ago.' James Cartlidge, the shadow defence secretary, accused Labour of 'treating British forces as second-class citizens'. He said: 'We consistently argued for an exemption to be applied. Labour must now urgently adopt that policy or accept they are delivering a deep unfairness to those who serve our country.' His concerns were echoed by Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst, a former British army veteran and fellow Conservative MP, who called the decision 'outrageous'. The MP for Solihull West and Shirley said: 'The Chancellor has reneged on her commitment to British serving personnel while standing by her commitment to the US military. It should be one rule for all.' Parents of children with special needs who are unable to get an education, health and care plan, faith groups and small independent schools have repeatedly lobbied Labour to consider an exemption, but their concerns have not been addressed. Their hopes now lie in the High Court where a legal challenge on behalf of more than 1,000 private schools is set to be heard before Easter which aims to show the controversial policy breaches the human rights of children. 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.
