The conviction of a man accused of religiously aggravated disorderly behaviour over the burning of a Koran outside the Turkish consulate in London could see a return to a prohibition on blasphemy, campaigners have warned.
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.
The charge sheet says that Coskun was motivated by hostility towards Muslims.
Coskun is accused of 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 is also accused of 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 5 of the Public Order Act 1986.
Coskun is on trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday and has pleaded not guilty to both charges.
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.”
