Latest news with #freedomofexpression
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Guardian
Hungary's crackdown on LGBTQ+ content violates human rights, says EU's top court
A Hungarian law banning content about LGBTQ+ people from schools and primetime TV has been found to violate basic human rights and freedom of expression by a senior legal scholar at the European court of justice. The non-binding opinion from the court's advocate-general, Tamara Ćapeta, issued on Thursday, represents a comprehensive demolition of the arguments made by the Hungarian government defending its so-called childprotection law, passed in 2021. The legislation, which has been likened to Russia's infamous 'gay propaganda law', means that gay and transgender people or themes cannot feature in school educational material or any TV show, film or advert shown before 10pm. In a resounding opinion, Ćapeta wrote that the law was not based on any scientific proof but a value judgment or – backing a position presented by the European parliament to the court – 'a prejudice that homosexual and non-cisgender [transgender] life is not of equal value or status as heterosexual and cisgender life'. Far from protecting children from harm, she concluded, the legislation 'expands such harm'. In her 69-page opinion she wrote: 'The stigmatising effects of the Hungarian legislation, which creates a climate of hostility towards LGBTI persons, may affect the feelings of identity, self-esteem and self-confidence of LGBTI persons. 'Minors who belong to the LGBTI community are especially affected, as the removal of information about LGBTI lives from the public sphere prevents them from realising that their life is not abnormal.' 'It also affects their acceptance by their peers, in school or other environments and thus affects their right to a 'private social life' as well. Therefore, rather than protecting minors from harm, the contested legislation expands such harm.' She concluded that Hungary had violated fundamental rights of human dignity, respect for family life and non-discrimination under the EU treaty and charter of fundamental rights. Ćapeta supported arguments that the law also breached EU commerce and audiovisual laws that prevent governments from imposing restrictions on media companies without a well-founded public interest. The opinion does not bind the court but ECJ judges follow the advocate general in most cases. The Hungarian government has been contacted for comment. Sign up to Headlines Europe A digest of the morning's main headlines from the Europe edition emailed direct to you every week day after newsletter promotion The European Commission began legal proceedings against Hungary in 2021 after the law was passed. The provisions against LGBTQ+ content were seen as especially stigmatising because they were part of a child protection law targeting child abusers. The opinion comes as Hungary continues its crackdown on LGBTQ+ rights. Lawmakers in April passed a constitutional amendment that codifies a ban on Pride events and allows authorities to use facial recognition technology to track attenders so they can be fined. Last month 17 EU member states, including France and Germany, signed a letter organised by the Dutch government condemning Hungary's anti-LGBTIQ+ legislation and urging Budapest to revise these measures. Many of those member states, 16, as well as the European parliament, joined the European Commission's case against Hungary on the law banning LGBTQ+ content.
Daily Mail
3 days ago
- General
- Daily Mail
A cynical drive is under way to shut down any criticism of Islam - and that will only cause further division: DR TAJ HARGEY
Freedom of expression is one of the pillars of British civilisation. It is the noble idea that lay at the heart of the Magna Carta, pioneered the development of parliamentary democracy and inspired the defeat of Nazi tyranny. But I fear this essential liberty is under grave threat from an ugly alliance of Muslim extremists and supine British officials who are conspiring – in the name of multicultural sensitivity – to give Islam a special status in our society. Dressed up as a form of trendy tolerance, this sinister strategy is already corroding public discourse and breeding a new form of 'two-tier justice'. That is the only conclusion I can draw from the disturbing case of Hamit Coskun, a Kurdish-Armenian protester who was convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offence on Monday after he burnt a copy of the Koran outside Turkey's consulate in London. Attacked by a knifeman at the time (who, farcically, will not face trial until 2027), the 50-year-old has now been punished by the British state and fined almost £350. As a progressive imam and Islamic theologian, I found Coksun's actions distasteful, offensive and utterly against the spirit of Britain where respect for people's beliefs and faiths is a central feature of our culture. And yet I am deeply troubled by the decision of the authorities to treat his conduct as a criminal offence. No one has been put in physical danger. The damage to property is slight. Nor is the legislation under which he has been charged being deployed as its makers intended. The Public Order Act is meant to deal with dangerous and abusive behaviour, not hurt feelings or religious sensibilities. This decision does not show British law operating at its majestic, impartial best. On the contrary, the depressing episode exposes the cynical drive to shut down any criticism of Islam. The conviction of Coskun is not an isolated case. It is part of a concerted push to erect a judicial forcefield around Islam – that will only sow further division. Anyone who thinks this is an exaggeration should consider the case of the schoolteacher in Batley, West Yorkshire, who showed his pupils a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed in 2021. Four years on and the teacher is living in hiding, fearing for his life after being targeted by Islamists. The drawing was presented during a classroom discussion about the Charlie Hebdo massacre in 2015, when terrorists targeted the French satirical magazine after it published drawings of the prophet. 'Je Suis Charlie,' Western leaders cried at the time as they expressed solidarity with the 12 victims of this horrific atrocity. But those were just empty words. In Britain, Europe and most of the West the concern of political elites and policymakers was to avoid offending Islam rather than defending our cherished democratic principles. That is why the Tory leader Kemi Badenoch was absolutely right to warn that, under Sir Keir Starmer's government, we could be seeing a specific blasphemy law to protect Islam creeping in by the back door. In 2008, the traditional British blasphemy laws were finally abolished. It is extraordinary that now, in the face of Muslim fundamentalists and fanatics, those laws could be resurrected to prop up a creed that barely existed in Britain before the mid-20th century. Islam is no more part of Britain's historic identity than Christianity is part of Morocco's or Pakistan's. Yet now the faith is being given a uniquely privileged position above all other religions in this country. That is a reflection not of some celestial truth but fear – given the demands and grievances of fundamentalist Muslims often come laced with the menace of violence. Any quasi-blasphemy law is little more than a form of appeasement by a cowardly political establishment that always offers the path of least resistance to hardliners. Little wonder that the Tories' justice spokesman Robert Jenrick warned this week that the policy will create a two-tier legal system – the very opposite of equality that is meant to be Labour's lodestar. This is not the road to peace. This will lead to more oppression, violence and extremism – such as we saw with the Charlie Hebdo killings and the savage attack on the great writer Salman Rushdie in 2022. The signs of surrender are all too clear. One glaring example of this institutional feebleness is the plan to introduce a new wide-ranging definition of Islamophobia under the 2010 Equality Act which – as its architect Harriet Harman declared – created 'a new social order in Britain'. Part of that new order could be the criminalisation of any criticism of Islam – a move that our forefathers would have found despicable and incomprehensible. Some supporters of this crackdown on free speech want to widen the definition of racially aggravated crimes to include any attacks on Islam or its believers. But that just illustrates the intellectual weakness of the fundamentalists' position. Islam is not a race, it is a religion, and people from all sorts of ethnic minorities are adherents. But the greater intellectual flaw is the pretence that blasphemy rules are sanctioned by the Koran. As a Muslim scholar, I can say categorically that this is a complete fabrication. There is nothing scriptural about the concept of blasphemy. In truth, the Koran advocates freedom of religion and mutual coexistence by welcoming other beliefs and viewpoints. 'To you, is your religion, and to me, mine,' says one striking verse in Islam's book. The tragedy of contemporary Islam, especially in the West, is that fundamentalists have been allowed to take charge. They have dictated the agenda, resulting in a triumph for radicalism. I believe orthodox Muslims' obsession with blasphemy stems not from Islam's transcendent text but from three manufactured additions to Islamic theology. I call them the 'Toxic Trio' because their influence has been so malign. First, there is the 'hadith', the reported sayings of Prophet Mohammed compiled centuries after his death. Second, is the 'sharia', a patriarchal concoction of medieval codes that justify authoritarianism and treat women as second-class citizens. Third, there are the 'fatwas', the risible opinions of self-important and politically motivated clerics. Their aim is not to promote spiritual enlightenment but to enhance the rulers' stranglehold on power. While the Toxic Trio is routinely used to justify blasphemy laws in Islam, it has no place in a liberal democracy like Britain. It is wrong on so many levels. By giving a unique status or protected standing to Islam, it contravenes the British imperative to fairness and justice. This is bound to cause resentment since other believers will not feel that they have the same protection. Indeed, it is hard to imagine that the state would have been as tough with someone who burnt a copy of the Bible outside the Italian Embassy in London. I am not arguing that we should widen a blasphemy law to cover every faith. Freedom of speech has already been undermined too much in modern Britain, as shown by the spread of cancel culture and the vast diversity industry, which only encourages people to feel perpetual offence. We should be moving in the opposite direction – towards a greater embrace of liberty, not by constricting hard-fought historic rights for free speech. That is the truly British way.
Zawya
3 days ago
- General
- Zawya
‘They target our reputation': Online attacks force Libyan journalists to self-censor
Journalists in Libya face frequent online harassment, which impedes their ability to fulfil their function as watchdogs against corruption, human rights abuses and other issues, journalists said last week during a round table discussion with the United Nations Support Mission in Libya. Thirty-one journalists from Libya's east, west and south joined the online discussion Thursday as part of the Basirah professional development programme, organised in coordination with UNSMIL's Human Rights Section. It will inform an upcoming workshop on 19 June, led by a digital safety expert from the international non-governmental organisation Committee to Protect Journalists, about ways journalists can shield themselves from online harassment. 'Discussing the online harassment of journalists is essential because it threatens the right to expression and leads some to retreat or self-censor,' said Eman Ben Amer, a journalist who attended the event. 'Ignoring it means silencing free voices.' The journalists, during the meeting, shared their personal experiences with harassment, shedding light on the form, frequency, and causes. Ninety-two per cent of participants, in a post-workshop survey, said they had personally experienced online harassment. The most reported form of harassment was abusive comments or messages on social media, including Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Journalists also described how harassers had taken photos or videos of them, manipulated them using deceitful editing or artificial intelligence, and then shared them widely. The harassment often escalated to death threats and, sometimes, actual physical attacks, they said. In some cases, mobilisation appeared to be coordinated, with some journalists noting that they 'trended' on social media because of harassment. 'They distorted my reputation to the point I found myself under investigation by state intelligence,' said one journalist, who was dismissed from their job after such an online attack. 'The recording is still on YouTube and now, even years later, people will post it in the comments when I publish anything.' The attacks were provoked by everything from the topic of a story to the sex, age or cultural background of the reporter. Sometimes the stories that sparked abuse were sensitive from a political or human rights perspective. One journalist related how they were attacked for promoting 'foreign agendas' when they covered a story about violence against women. But at other times, the stories were seemingly non-controversial. For example, one journalist recounted how they were attacked for broadcasting a sports match on accusations of 'supporting the opposing team.' Another was harassed for reporting on flood victims in Derna. Female journalists reported particular trouble, saying they were harassed for nearly everything they published—regardless of topic. "Being a female journalist in Libyan society is very difficult,' one journalist said. 'They target a woman's reputation and honour – make things personal.' Eighty-six per cent of journalists, in the post-workshop survey, said harassment had impacted their work in some way. Thirty per cent reported reducing their social media presence to avoid backlash – a major handicap in the media sector. Thirty per cent said they 'censored or softened' their language to avoid offending certain parties. Others said they avoided writing about controversial topics altogether. 'Journalists need a safe space to work freely and honestly,' said journalist Mohammed Fozy. 'Without that, free media can't exist.' Journalists and other media professionals are invited to register for the Basirah programme, including the upcoming Basirah workshop on how journalists can protect themselves from online harassment, here: (link) Distributed by APO Group on behalf of United Nations Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL).
BBC News
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- BBC News
Bradford Literature Festival CEO says no topic is off limits
Multi-culturalism, the Israel-Palestine conflict and freedom of expression are among the topics due to be discussed at this year's Bradford Literature on 27 June, the annual event will be held in venues across the city, and feature panel discussions, lectures and workshops over 10 the guests due to appear at the event are poet John Cooper Clarke, broadcaster Mishal Husain and actor Larry co-founder Syima Aslam said: "We are rooted in books, but I always say there is nothing in the world that there isn't a book about so there is nothing that we can't talk about." Ms Aslam, who grew up in Bradford, launched the festival in 2014 with a view to making literature accessible to the city's diverse said she wanted to overcome the financial barriers for people in Bradford, as well as other cities in the UK, which stopped many from enjoying cultural events."We have to recognise that those barriers are real, with the cost of living and all of those things," Ms Aslam said."One of the tests that I've always applied to the festival is if you're a single mum with four kids to feed, are you going to feed them or are they going to come to the festival?"So, we've done a lot of work in that area to ensure that's not the case." Bradford Literature Festival is a Community Interest Company, which means it exists to benefit the community rather than private Aslam said: "Having a festival that is openly accessible to everyone, that everyone feels they can take part in and there are no financial barriers is really, really important."I don't think we can talk about wanting everyone to engage in culture and not think about the barriers that actually mean they may not be able to."So, for us it's a founding principle and it's one of the foundations that we are built on."The full programme is due to be published on the Bradford Literature Festival in the coming weeks. Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Washington Post
4 days ago
- General
- Washington Post
A man is convicted and fined for burning a copy of the Quran in London
LONDON — A man who burned a copy of the Quran and shouted 'Islam is religion of terrorism' outside the Turkish consulate in London was convicted Monday of a religiously aggravated public order offense and fined. Free speech campaign groups raised concerns that his conviction was against the freedom of expression and vowed to appeal.
